 |  |
District Events
CALENDAR|
Public Hearing Minutes This event starts on Sep 26, 2005 and runs through Sep 26, 2005 |
|---|
Minutes of
the Public Hearing held Monday, September 26th, 2005 @ 7:00 p.m. at
Costin Hall, PRESENT: Council: Mayor
C. Haime Councillor
S. Crayston Councillor
B. Dempsey Councillor
W. Griffey Councillor
D. Parkhurst Councillor
D. Scott Staff: Twyla Graff, Director of Corporate Administration Pamela
Shaw, Planning Consultant Rob
Roycroft, Facilitator Gallery: Approximately 74 OPENING
REMARKS: Mayor Haime welcomed those
present and stated the purpose of tonight’s hearing was to hear representations
from individuals regarding “District of Lantzville Official Community Plan
Bylaw No. 50, 2005”. All persons who
believe that their interest in property is affected by the proposed Bylaw will
be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written
submissions respecting matters contained in the Bylaw. Written submissions
submitted at the public hearing total approximately thirty-nine. Mayor Haime noted that the
Bylaw had been given first and second reading by Council on July 25th,
2005. Further, that a Public Hearing
was conducted on September 14th, 2005. Mayor Haime then continued to explain that at
a Regular Meeting of Council held September 19th, 2005, Council
elected to propose amendments to the OCP and given that one of the amendments
would see an alteration in density, Council was required to conduct a second
Public Hearing on the Bylaw. Amendments
proposed at the September 19th, 2005, Regular Meeting of Council are
as follows: 1. that
Council will not entertain amendments to the Bylaw for two years following date
of adoption however, will entertain amendments on an annual basis after the two
year period has expired. 2. that
the OCP be amended to reinstate the Estate Residential land use designation and
water service area boundary as in “Regional District of Nanaimo Lantzville OCP
Bylaw No. 974, 1995”; and 3. to
incorporate appropriate wording that Council must immediately commence a Liquid
Waste Management Plan (LWMP) to include a study on what areas of Lantzville are
able to sustain on-site sewage disposal. These amendments were
contained in the OCP as advertised in the Notice of the second Public
Hearing. Mayor Haime then turned the
meeting over to Mr. Rob Roycroft, facilitator.
Mr. Roycroft informed those present of the rules of the hearing as
established by the Chair, Mayor Haime, and as there was a Speakers List
established invited the first individual to come forward, Mr. Ian Savage. Mr. Ian Savage, -
commented that
being restricted to three minutes is not enough time however, adoption of the
bylaw may not be valid given that Pleasant Valley/East Wellington community
plan has not yet been revised and within that plan still contains lands that
have been acquired by Lantzville when Lantzville incorporated and his opinion
that notification should have gone to those individuals as well -
if you adopt the
OCP tonight you will have two community plans in existence that contradict each
other - process of this community plan is absolutely dead wrong for what this community deserves - council received no mandate to radically change Lantzville - council has indicated that you were mandated by provincial legislation to create a new OCP within two years but that is absolutely incorrect and in fact, it relates to a requirement to come up with a new RGS in relationship to the whole overall plan for the regional district within two years, which by the way, has expired - OCP Steering Committee was hand selected by Council, bless them for their time and efforts but it is Council’s doing that not one person on this committee represents majority view point -
730 units for
the Foothills was simply a figure offered by Foothills representatives, no
negotiations, per say took place and two OCP public meetings during the process
that were held for no other reason than for the developer to present his
project and no other land owners were given this opportunity -
the community
survey’s were ignored along with written letters and speakers from September 14,
Public Hearing were totally ignored -
vast majority
and written submissions were opposed to this OCP and major input was opposed to
overdevelopment in Lantzville, no concessions made whatsoever in the OCP -
written
submissions tonight will also be totally ignored, with Council meeting right
after this public hearing which has the new OCP on the agenda and if its being
adopted before you have read the submissions that is highly unusual and speaks
to how seriously you are not taking input from people -
biggest flaw in
the process -- you refuse to let residents decide in the next election, 54 days
from now Mrs. Eileen Tegart, Mrs. Tegart read from a prepared
statement and is attached to and forms part of these minutes. Mr. Jack Arnold, -
has reservations
since the grant from the government was supposedly linked to down-zoning
properties, seems rather strange that immediately after we spoke to you people
you amended the OCP, and thank god you did - does this mean you don’t get a grant or what else is there that we aren’t being told -
if we are going
to have the old zoning and I talked to someone at the Regional District and
Lantzville office, there could be some other small impediments should property
owners wish to split their property in half, please clarify -
not against
development but development has to be rational and planned -
if aquifer is as
fragile (and no reason to believe it isn’t) then to allow Foothills or any
major development to come in here and use it is wrong -- let them foot the bill
for water, let them spend the money, let them put it in -
wonder about the
handouts to people that are large developers – I’ve done developing on the side
and did so expecting nothing and it was I who put up large sums of money, down,
in trust, think all developers should do that, (case in Nanaimo where taxpayers
are affected) -
I like Lantzville,
choose to shop at little store because of its nature, choose to purchase beer
and wine here, get repairs on my car at the Shell station but if you consider
cities in the states like Leavenworth – they have an identity that draws people
to them, I think Lantzville has the same thing, opportunity here not to compete
with Nanaimo, or big, wall to wall strip, but rather to keep Lantzville’s rural
identity -
I love going to
the Sow’s Ear medical clinic, use the prescription centre -
wasn’t even
involved in this much (OCP process) but did sit down and read the whole plan,
and there is something that isn’t Lantzville about it, it’s going to loose its
natural quality that keeps people living here -- is that what you want as it seems
to be the focus of the plan Ms. Beverly Schmid, -
against OCP and
amendments -
came out three
times and showed in numbers we were against the OCP -
stuck us in a
small hall, but the masses still turned out -
you make me feel
that I live in a communist country, where we don’t have rights -
a number of
opposition to OCP and foothills and this should be recognized and respected -
we vote people
in and we can vote them out Mayor & Council -
grandfather
fought in one of the wars, away from family for five years, property on Beban
mountain, that mountain is now Provincial park, I have roots in Alberta in
Lloydminster, oil people in our family, own most of the Town of Lloydminster, but
managed to keep a lot of land for cows, etc., believe development brings
prosperity, but I love the land, love the animals, love the water, if we do not
manage what we have and treasure it, it will end up like other parts of the
country, mainland, development has wrecked it -
once you start
breaking down the environment, water, animals, marsh in the foothills used to
have beavers, no beavers left, cougars in grasslands of the foothills, rabbits,
owls, marmots, a lot of them are gone now -
development does
bring prosperity but must be done in a fair and balanced way, if not going to
end up with an ugly mountain -
going to end up with
people not having enough water and in the long run, down the road, this is not
going to benefit our children -
already on my
road I have seen change. My road used to
be peaceful, I was almost hit by a motorbike, teenagers that have no respect
that scream at you … they think they can get away with things -- called the RCMP
six times -
what’s it going
to be like when the big development happens, think about what you do because it
will not just affect me but you too Mrs. Marilyn Smith, 7860
Hobson’s Road Mrs. Smith read from a prepared
statement and is attached to and forms part of these minutes. Mr. Mr. Dickinson read from a prepared
statement and is attached to and forms part of these minutes. Mrs. Ella Ashcraft, Mrs. Ashcraft also read from a
prepared statement and is attached to and forms part of these minutes. Ms. Judy Robertson, -
thanks to Ian
Savage for being Council watchdog for all these months -
properly installed
and maintained septic system is most environmentally competent way of dealing with
sewage vs. flushing into the ocean that acts as a huge toilet for aquatic life
to deal with -
monies should be
spent on educating the public on proper maintenance of septic systems versus
monies spent on studies for sewer systems -
object to the
development of the Foothills, the issues of drainage and increased storm drainage,
traffic etc., have to be addressed Mr. Al Girard, 7825
Hobson’s Road -
chance to say
thank you for listening to some of us on the Estate Residential down-zoning
concerns however, listening to others whose locations haven’t been dealt with and
are still potentially being hurt – big concern for us in Lantzville -
attended Council
meetings and hearing that some of our septic fields are failing ie., the tanks
are floating in water, installed floating in water (long time ago), no wonder
that we have a waste problem and if LWMP will look at all the septic concerns,
then that is what we need to do -- look for solutions and if it turns out that
these systems are failing, then we have to deal with that -
can’t continue
to have sewage flowing in our ditches -
Foothills has to
come about with a sewer system of sorts that is going to take care of the
problem immediately and not add to the problem -
water is a huge
issue and if we are going to allow development in the Foothills, we can’t allow
coming out of our water system – it’s at its maximum now -- has to be provided
by foothills and not taxpayers of Lantzville.
Mr. Jack Roberts, Mr. Roberts read from a prepared
statement and is attached to and forms part of these minutes. Mr. Ron Irving, -
strongly opposed
to OCP -
biggest concern
is the zoning and all people should be treated the same -
his property in
the ALR and when purchased 13 years ago it was possible to subdivide into 4 – 5
acre pieces, now that is taken away and has a great deal in the difference in
value -
other ALR
properties are affected in the same way however property owners don’t realize
it -
need a
referendum on OCP and economically feasible given the upcoming election - majority of people are against this Mr. Remi Buydens, -
yes, you did
take some of us out of the down-zoning but don’t think that is enough -
everybody in
this community should be treated equal -- all should be taken out and put back
into water service area -
totally
disgusting leaving certain people out and appears like a red herring, making
some of us happy and using the remainder to get your grants, as we are led to
believe -
walk in my boots
for one whole week, everybody walk in our boots for one whole week -
been to a lot of
meetings, tried to submit letters, etc., if couldn’t attend, feedback I get
from certain people that everybody is in favour of this, however, all the
meetings, never seen more speakers at a meeting than I did a week ago on the 14th,
where there were 93 speakers and only three spoke in favour (for part of it) -
should tell us
what the people want in this community and how they would like to keep it
rural, don’t want high density, but not against progress -
don’t believe
high density is the answer, if your going to fix up sewer or bring sewer how
about properties in the village get first crack and not new developers like Foothills/Gee
property, how about 40, 50 year residents, that’s why we pay taxes -
postpone and
take more time, let’s do it right -- second time is too late, do it right the
first time Mr. Bill Lorenzen on
behalf of Mr. Barry LaPointe, 8465 Lisa Lane Mr. Lorenzen read from a prepared
statement written by Mr. Barry LaPointe and is attached to and forms part of
these minutes. Mr. Roycroft announced that we had come to the
conclusion of the Speaker’s list and invited anyone who has not had an
opportunity to speak for the first time and who would like to do so to please
step forward. Mr. Albert Stewart, -
community should
welcome a wide range of residents -
should be space
for families with young children, teenagers, and when kids have grown and moved
away -
should be space
for independent kids when move way from home within the community and young
couples who are just starting out -
needs to be
space for older people, people who must downsize their homes and they need to
be included in the community so can stay living near friends and family -
some of those needs
are not being met with present situation -
need for
sustainability -
when I first moved
to Lantzville in 40s, small village, no zoning, mixed community, many different
kinds of people could live here -- as time goes on there have been zoning bylaws
adopted and some of those restrictions have kept groups away -
want to continue
to have a community where many different people can come to live -
my vision for
Lantzville is a village core where residents can have most of their needs met -
we need living
units for 1 - 2 people each and within 1 to 2 km walking distance -
have read the
bylaw, looked at maps and I think it moves us in the direction I want -- it may
not satisfy everyone but I support it. Mr. Ross Fraser, 7180
Lancrest Terrace -
couldn’t attend
last hearing but did send written submission -
like to say that
I commend Council for their efforts made to be fair in drawing up a community
plan, which by definition, can not please everyone -
pleased council
addressed down-zoning, legitimate concern of many residents and may be more
attention needed to that -
people I speak
to in Lantzville, for the most part, feel council has made a reasonable effort,
public information, input and attention here tonight indicate that -
down-zoning
problems have been solved for significant number of people -
attendance here
tonight indicates a broad degree of satisfaction -
good base to start
building a future of Lantzville which is what we must do, because surrounded by
unprecedented growth and have to take our place in the context of that picture,
can’t ignore what is happening on -
positive
features of the plan -- seniors, address
potential problems of pollution in Lantzville, town is getting 900 acres of
parkland, including trail ways that is something most communities would die to
have … so, off to a good start -
urge you to
proceed and put OCP in place -
I think the plan
represents a reasonable consensus of people I speak to Mr. Bill Lorenzen, -
lived here since
‘67 -
friend of last
speaker however certainly disagree with what he has just said -
believe in
democratic process, step in the right direction for us to produce our own OCP,
not opposed to that, know we need one, and all for one, but don’t believe this represents
what I would like to see -
found number of
properties that are just waiting for this to go through with the implied
impression that the present council supports development. Gee property, purchased and someone living in
the house, looking to develop, 60+ acres, 20 some acres next to golf course has
been purchased, not by someone who wants to live on it but develop -
advocating that
we should now open ourselves up to having private school and 100+ students, no
challenge for their sewage and water … some proponents for having this in OCP
that’s a good thing but Seaview school is dropping but be damned if I send my
kids there (referring to a couple members of Council) -- disappointed in that
kind of an approach -
understand that
private schools have a function in society -- used to teach at a private school
however, when Seaview is declining different circumstances -
Ware Road
proposal -- happen to be a senior for a numbers of years now and not in the
least interested in sacrificing rest of Lantzville so that I have a home to go
to down the road -- speaking as a senior -
Foothills - 1825
acres supported strenuously by this council, haven’t heard from one objecting
that it appears in the OCP -
Interesting that
BC government web site -- under Ministry of Economic Development notes that the
Foothills development will include single and multi family units, commercial
area, golf course, and approx. 400 – 500 acres of parkland and trails, now
somebody is giving us the wrong information -- could be BC government -
website
indicates start of summer 2005 and finish in 2015 told repeatedly by some
council members, that those really believe it would take 25 years, insane to consider
this as a less than 25 year project, here they say 10 years and website was
updated June 2005 -
mentioned
multi-family units, apartments, condo, golf course, not 900 acres of park, with
these concerns -- urge you to think of Lantzville -
I don’t find anyone
speaking in favour of this plan -
previous
speakers have mentioned 54 days until the election, please take your time,
postpone, don’t bring it forward for third reading and let’s see you after the
election. Maybe you won’t all be there
but give us a chance to discuss this with other potential council members -
take your time,
don’t vote until after November elections Mr. Hans Larsen, Mr. Larsen read from a prepared
statement and is attached to and forms part of these minutes. Mr. Bill Barsby, -
against OCP and
a lot of it is because we have been snowballed by Council -
told at meeting
in July that down-zoning was addressed, given hope and kicked in the face when
truth came out -
Councillor Griffey
saying 20 – 25 years for the Foothills development to be completed but the -
work for a
developer, part of my living, nothing against if in moderate way -
learn a lesson
from Dave Scott, forgot about development costs, should consult with him 65
acres would take 6 months. Property up
there is sold instantly, $250,000 for the same lot, without a house, so if a
person, comes in, buys lands and then resells it, the average individual, small
person, young family, is going to pay right through the nose for it -
individual treatment
plants work very well and they have to be engineered, guarantee by people
putting them in and would like to see that happen here rather than dumping it
out into the ocean – currently five existing pulp mills, etc., dumping in the
ocean -- can we not do it a different way Mr. Roycroft asked for the second time if there was
anyone from the gallery wishing to speak for the first time. Mr. Roycroft asked for a third time if there was
anyone wishing to speak for the first time.
Hearing none, Mr. Roycroft invited individuals who would like to speak
for a second time.
Mr. Jack Arnold, -
knocked on over
40 doors since last council meeting and told people of second public hearing,
some of whom are here but also received response that there’s no point that
Council will do what they want -
unfortunately I
think that has become a standard in BC lately -- doesn’t matter what the people
want once Council has the power -
the whole nature
of what Lantzville can be, the uniqueness of the little community and the cross
section of things that is available, strive hard to preserve, since your next
to Nanaimo craziness, and when I think of lots less than 5,000 sq. ft. go look
what 9,000 and 8,000 look like in eaglepoint, ugly, ugly development, so please
think about these things Mrs.
Eileen Tegert – -
take exception
to the fact that the absence of people here was because down-zoning was the
only issue -
five members of
Council look like their paying attention and one is obviously bored to tears -
like Ian Savage
said, David and Goliath story, up and down the streets, door to door, finding
out public opinion and like Jack Arnold said, what’s the use -- I myself felt
the same thing what’s the use -- didn’t go door to door because what’s the use -
not due to lack
of interest, people out there do not want this and has been said over and over
and over and were just hitting a brick wall Mr.
Remi Buydens, -
regarding no
amendment can be made for two years, I think that is going back to Polland, Russian
days, not democracy when can’t change something -
doesn’t make a
good community plan when things like that are put in -
regarding 900
parkland, we didn’t go to the mountains, kids always asked to go to the beach -
we have a lot of
national parks, don’t have to put one up in the -
let’s take our
time, let’s not rush this through tonight, let’s wait a few weeks, months, and
make it for everybody, not just a select few Mr.
Ian Savage, -
hope everyone
has had their say -
insist on
putting everything on the record -
down-zoning
speaks volumes -- that’s what I’m
hearing, most of the people involved still do not know what is going on. I personally sent letters to these people,
why they weren’t informed by Council -- what a discourtesy to your fellow
residents -
as it stands, I don’t
care if there is one property left (down-zoned), you help your neighbour, and
if one needs help you help them -
four properties
on Stone Road and Superior Road that have zoning rights for ½ acre lots size,
they may think they have been appeased – bought properties with that zoning in
place, so leave them be -
ten properties
on -
what a rush you
are in – by going ahead to adopt an OCP, where you yourself don’t even
understand what is in it – its not the way you do it -
not personal
attacks on you but not one of you nor staff knew, at July 25th
Council meeting, how many properties were being down-zoned not one of you knew
the answer or staff, I then, provided the answer -
why then were
you about to pass a community plan where you didn’t know how many properties
were being down-zoned and I dare say it’s happening again, your not aware of
the ramifications and not sure why your in such a hurry -
not wanting to
ramble on, but not letting this go ahead without a number of points being made for the record regarding what was wrong
with process and content of OCP -
credibility is
in question, one point comments made Seaview closing, this was given as a main
reason at July 25 Council meeting -- the minutes of that meeting had the words
that Seaview would close if decline in enrollment and when researched myself
found it to be groundless, Seaview school is not closing despite declining
enrolment, also noted that minutes were then changed -
affordable
housing - just simply does not make sense, brand new housing on small lot or
not is going to be more expensive than many of the existing older or smaller
houses in Lantzville, can not create more affordable housing by creating high
density, only way is to decrease property values by making land less desirable and
who wants to do that -
seniors housing
– again, deeply troubled that I had to go to so much time, trouble and my own
money to do things that aren’t my roll by hosting a seniors housing meeting on
my own -- fed up with idea that we can not have seniors housing without all
this over development -
turn out at
seniors meeting was miniscule -- no one at the meeting that wanted seniors housing
but possibly a couple that wanted it in the future -
in Nanaimo, there
are seniors housing developments that stand on their own, developers want to do
it because it sells and their making money off of it, don’t have to give
developers the world just because doing seniors housing -
find it incredibly
disingenuous that we have to have all this development just to get seniors
housing -
sewer system,
couldn’t begin to address in one hour -- involved for at least 10 years and
far, far more to it than meets the eye, many things related to it but just to
say coliform counts in ditches and therefore we hook up to Nanaimo is a complete
insult to those of us who have spent a great deal of time on this issue -
chaired committee
in ’90s to look for ways to address this and I got lambasted by a number of
people that were so pro in hooking up to -
did teach me far
more complex issue, analyze problem first -- you don’t just take counts in
ditches -
there are places
with sewers that have coliform counts in ditches -
sewers do not
necessarily correct problem and encouraged Council to look for options in a kind,
passionate, knowledgeable, and considerate way as cost for sewer system is
going to be phenomenal and people just can not afford it Mr. Roycroft asked for a second time if there were
any individuals from the gallery wishing to speak for a second time, or first
time. Hearing none, Mr. Roycroft invited
individuals for a third time to come forward if they had any more comments or
submissions regarding the proposed Bylaw.
Mr.
Ian Savage, -
Council insists
that all options are going to be explored (sewer) but all of you have in mind to
hook up to -
Council
indicating that not involved in creating OCP well that is just beyond belief,
my imagination is not big enough to consider that possibility -
Council hand
picked OCP committee while Mayor and another councillor sat on the committee -
when asked in
January it was noted that both Council and the OCP Steering Committee okayed
the 730 figure for the foothills, that obviously is being involved -
sold OCP plan a
number of times at open houses where bent on promoting it rather than listening
-- mayor’s website promotes -
been absolutely
savaged for daring to stand up and challenge you and especially what I hear
behind my back and now we find out that councillors have been phoning residents
promoting the OCP one on one – again speaks to credibility -
don’t pretend that
you haven’t had any input -
Costin hall
capacity fire regulations – gentleman who has always rented the hall says its
175, deputy administrator said 175 then went up to 250 after being in touch
with the fire commissioners office and now latest is 500+ apparently, again, comes
down to credibility – if Lantzville owns hall then have regulations set in
place Mr. Roycroft interjected and
requested that Mr. Savage limit his comments to the Bylaw itself. Mr.
Savage continued … -
people did not
get to enjoy the Sept. 14 meeting or speak to it because of the fact that it
was so overcrowded so I believe I am speaking to it -
now in this new
OCP, any kind of school can go in most residential areas of Lantzville -
OCP consultant
stated this was done specifically for Aspengrove school, why is this school
receiving special treatment, or are you sincere when you are now saying that
any school can go in any neighbourhood and I am a believer in fairness … and if
your allowing any school in residential areas then nothing specified in OCP
would restrict a dance school, Muslim school, or music school -- if states for
one is that the new policy? -
Seaview school
and on one hand pining about declining enrollment, yet encouraging competitive
school -
septic fields
and your complaints about them yet allow them at Aspengrove -
no amendments
for two years after adoption, again all speaks to credibility -
now to move onto
content of plan, addressed the down-zoning, would like to go through different
areas that are being changed in this community plan -
Foothills Comprehensive
Development Plan Area allows 730 dwelling units, hasn’t even been negotiated
seriously, so why appearing in the OCP.
Personally, feel far better negotiations could have been done, nothing wrong with trying to gain parkland,
that effort should be commended, but going from 108 lots at 19.765 acres up to
730 dwelling units with a min lot size of ¼ acre (smallest) huge giveaway and
why on earth are not more serious negotiations being done so density can be
created for same punch -
why aren’t we ensuring
that the land we may be getting as public park is not something that will give
us another source of water rather than just accepting park land -
Ware Road currently
zoned for development when two times huge turnouts in opposition to it to force
it to be defeated, and here we are a third time with an identical proposal in
terms of its scope, yet being proposed yet again -
aside from the
Ware Road development a few other properties that go all the way to Peterson
that are getting greatly increased density so that up to 22 condo can go onto 5
acres -- something else that is a great increase and no community input or
support for that -
residential
zoning to me is the worst of all of it, taking huge swath of Lantzville and
zoning it this new zone, called residential (pink) in this current border
around this land it allows currently 1 acre and ½ acre minimum lot size, now
increasing to 1/3 acre minimum on any development that is three or four lots or
more subdivisions, the bigger parcels of land, and allowing 1/3 min lot size
and with that scenario if give up 20% of land for parkland they can go to ¼
acre. This pink zone is all of lower
Lantzville except for higher density areas and farmland and a big piece of
upper Lantzville as well, including Gee property -- how on earth is that going
to keep Lantzville quiet, peaceful, green, rural feeling community, no reward
for doing so -
4.2.12 –
District will support dedication to the crown of the beds of all creeks shown
on map 10 where ever subdivision on those watercourses are proposed, so through
subdivision the provincial government will gain jurisdiction of our creek beds -
small items in
the OCP that would bear more thought and more public input -
need all this
development for economic incentives, for sewer and water, (arguments for the
plan), never understood the reason for the plan because never given it, no
formal linking nor any logical explanation or any argument that rises to the
point of being acceptable let alone a firm excellent argument, linking water
and sewer to this OCP -
the more
development you can bring to Lantzville increases the possibility to spread out
the capital costs of the sewer, hence people will be paying less, ultimately
for sewer connection, than we would if we remain as we are, maybe these are reasons
for overdevelopment but haven’t proved that, haven’t analyzed it -
water same
comments could apply -- haven’t seen coherent, cohesive, relationship explained
… more secure water supply, haven’t seen the argument and it must be made -
everyone knows
that sewer systems increase water consumption -- studies show that this is the
case, people on sewers consume more than those on septic fields, simply studies
have shown that -
basically, just
to reiterate once again that to me the collective knowledge of everyone is far
greater than the knowledge of a few and none of us should be so arrogant that
we think we have all the answers and from what I have heard I have heard people
speak very knowledgably about where this community should go -
a lot of residents
have come from wrecked communities from these same promises of sewer, water and
over development which results in people leaving those communities -
all of us
together, at least the majority should be on board which it isn’t -- this OCP is not what the majority of us want -
no business passing
-- no mandate to do so Mrs.
Maureen Roach, -
compelled to
stand up and support the gentleman who spoke who said we need all types of
housing in Lantzville -
know many, many
people who have been forced to leave Lantzville because simply not senior
housing here for them and I think its too bad that this is happening and when
Ian Savage gets up and says he has no indication that seniors housing is
needed, he is quite wrong -
I also feel that
it is too bad that anybody should buy property here and then have it down-zoned
I don’t think that is fair either Mr.
Rene Bertrand, -
noticed after
attending a number of meetings very apparent that community is very divided -
tremendous
amount of frustration and anger and its spilling out all over the place -
sad to see in a
small community like this -
know the challenge
you people have is a big one, would not want to be in your shoes, people can
speak towards the process, you really try to do what you can do, you’re human
beings as well and you can make mistakes, but because this community is really
divided, would encourage you to put this to a referendum -
need to ensure
that you have the majority behind you -- put it to a referendum Mr. Roycroft again invited any
individuals to speak for a first, second or third time. Hearing none, Mr. Roycroft invited
individuals for a third and last time to come forward if they had any more
comments or submissions regarding the proposed Bylaw. Hearing none, Mr. Roycroft turned the meeting over to
Mayor Colin Haime, Chair. Mayor Haime, noting that there were no other persons
wishing to speak declared the hearing closed at 8:53 p.m. Mayor Haime continued by advising those
individuals present that the Regular Meeting of Council would convene in
approximately thirty minutes to allow Council the opportunity to review written
submissions received during this public hearing as Council will be considering
giving third reading and final adoption to the “District of Lantzville Official
Community Plan Bylaw No. 50, 2005”. Certified Correct: Director of Corporate Administration Confirmed this 11th day of October, 2005. Mayor |
| Event Name: Public Hearing Mins | Event Category: Public Hearing |