Home  Directors |  Meeting Minutes Membership |  Projects  BBQ |  Neighbourhood Plan |  About Us |  Businesses   | Contact Us 


"Future of Carr's Landing"





WORKSHOP #1 (Coral Beach, Terrace & Juniper Streets)


                                                               DATE:         October 9, 2003

                                                                TIME:         7:00 PM – 9:30 PM

                                                      LOCATION:        Camp Arbuckle


         IN ATTENDANCE:                                      

         Mark Decker                                                    Frits Bakker                 

         Joanne Devries                                                 Chuck Price

         Lea                                                                  Larry Foster     

         Lance Marshall – Co-Chair                                Frank – Land Use

         Margaret – Land Use                                        Flo                                            Stan Brynjolfson (absent)




RECORDING SECRETARY:  Liisa Cook, Platinum Personnel



1.      CALL TO ORDER          7:05pm  Joanne Devries, Meeting Facilitator.

JoAnne lives in Lake Country but not in the Carrs Landing area.

Joanne introduced the Sector Planning members and asked that when the public in attendance begin giving their comments that they first give their name and speak clearly, as these meetings are being recorded as accurately as possible.


2.      REVIEW OF AGENDA   Joanne reviewed how the meeting would be conducted. A member of each focus group: Parks & Recreation, Environment, Infrastructure and Land-Use will give a presentation with open discussion time following. The handout was available for everyone to use for jotting down notes as the presentations are underway. A Comment Form was handed out for attendees to fill out with any further comments and handed back to Joanne at the end of the workshop.


The process began with the strategic plan and a simple questionnaire went out to the Carrs Landing residents. The Planning Hierarchy includes: 1)The Strategic Plan, 2) Official Community Plan, 3) Sector Plan, 4) Neighbourhood Plan, 5) Zoning Bylaw, and 6) Supporting Plans/Bylaws.



-     Meet statutory requirements as an amendment to the OCP and be based on the policies of the existing OCP

-     Reflect broad community involvement and support.

-     Be easy to read, understand and use on a daily basis at Municipal Hall

-     Have policies that are fiscally responsible, technically feasible and legally enforceable.

-     Be completed on time and within budget.

-     Have the endorsement of Council and DLC staff.


The Carr’s Landing Sector Plan: Process and Timeline is at about the half way point of this process. The next step after the four Sector Planning Workshops is to gather the information about the issues and components and present these issues to the Council and the public.  A draft Sector Plan will be prepared for review from December 2003 / March 2004. Following will be another Community Survey, conducted in March 2004, which will be much more detailed and more specific than the first survey conducted in 2002.  The draft Sector Plan will be presented to the public at an Open House in March of 2004. April 2004 the draft Sector Plan will be revised to reflect the public input at the Open House and will be fine-tuned until the public can condone the plan. May 2004 a revised draft of the Sector Plan will be presented to Council and they will work together with the DLC staff to fine-tune the Sector Plan. Finally in June 2004 the proposed Sector Plan will be presented at a Public Hearing.


Joanne congratulated all the people involved with this process and their commitment to this plan



  • “Complete” and “progressive” consultation

- “ Complete” consultation includes opportunities for qualitative and quantitative input and review

    • Qualitative processes (focus groups and open houses) identify broad-based issues through discussions with small groups of people.
    • Quantitative processes (mail-in surveys) validate information gathered during qualitative processes.

- “Progressive” consultation uses the broad-based information gathered during qualitative process to craft more specific and meaningful questions for quantitative review.



1.             Community survey #1

2.             Ongoing focus groups

3.             Neighbourhood workshops

4.             Community survey #2

5.             First Nations liaison

6.             Open House

7.             Public Hearing



·         What do you like about your community?

1.                   Rural and natural

2.                   Quiet and peaceful

3.                   Neighbourly and friendly

4.                   Scenic beauty

5.                   Close to amenities

6.                   Wildlife

7.                   Lake

8.                   Low density/open and spacious


·         What existing land uses, services or issues presently concern you?

1.                   Roads, CLR deterioration, road ends

2.                   Lack of planned development, development proposals

3.                   High-density growth.

4.                   Water quality, safety

5.                   Environmental damage

6.                   Lack of water

7.                   Safety of CLR, speed


·         What types of new land uses, activities or services would you like to see in your community?

1.                   Recreation, green space, walk/bike

2.                   Low-density, rural

3.                   CL village store, restaurant, rec centre

4.                   Public lakeshore access

5.                   Roads

6.                   Leave same

7.                   Community-directed planning


·         How would you like to see your community look in 10 years and grow for your children and grandchildren?

1.                   Low-density, rural, family residences

2.                   Recreation, greenspace, walks, bikes

3.                   Leave same

4.                   Roads

5.                   Public lakeshore access

6.                   Community-directed planning

7.                   CL village store, restaurant, community centre

8.                   Environmental protection



Ø      Rural and natural area

Ø      Low-density development

Ø      Community-directed planning

Ø      Expanded amenities

Ø      Green space with associated recreational opportunities

Ø      Quality water

Ø      Good roads

Ø      Lakeshore access



·         Parks & Recreation

·         Environment

·         Infrastructure

·         Land-Use

Focus groups developed for these four issues



-     Focus Groups

      - Who participates in the focus groups?

                  - Community volunteers

      - How often do they meet?

                  - Once monthly

      - What are the objectives of the focus groups?

                  - To gather information about community issues

                  - To gather residents’ input about the issues

                  - To prioritize the issues and make recommendations to Council


Joanne showed an Issue Analysis Worksheet and reviewed it to show how detailed the process is. A sound plan is based on complete knowledge.



Mark is the Chair of the Parks & Recreation focus group.

-     Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering, and focus group members

      -           Parks and facilities

      -           Roadend/foreshore access development

      -           Boat launches

      -           Trails and parklands


1.       Parks & Facilities

- Existing facilities and how they are used

- Improvements for existing facilities

- Future requirements

- Location of future parks




2.       Road-end Development

- What are “road ends”?

- Preserve and maintain in the public trust

- Inventory road ends

- Categorize the inventory as to park development potential

- Link road ends to triail system


3.       Boat Launches

- Why is this an issue unto itself?

- Analyze the need for additional boat launch facilities

- Survey locations for suitability

- Evaluate potential sites for positive and negative impacts

- Make recommendations


4.       Parklands & Trails

- Where should trail corridors be established?

- How do we acquire property for trail corridors?

- Linking trails

- Multiple benefits of trail of parkland corridors

- Develop and integrated plan


4.      ENVIRONMENT PRESENTED BY MARK DECKER  (Stan Brynjolfson not available)

- Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering, and focus group members

-           Lakeshore preservation/access

-           Wildlife conservation and corridors

-           Rural/urban mix

-           Wildland/urban interface fire hazard

-           Other


1.       Lakeshore Preservation/access

- Obstruction of foreshore to wildlife by docks, fences, walls, and human activity

- Water quality degradation from runoff and septic waste leaching into the lake.

- Impact of water craft (especially power boats) on wildlife and lakeside residents

- Light pollution from increased shoreline development (dock lighting, etc.)


2.       Wildlife conservation and corridors

- Preserve/restore habitat and access to lakeshore

- Obstruction of wildlife corridors by agricultural and residential fencing

- Pesticide use

- Gull sanctuary

- Preserve/restore shoreline ecosystems

- Minimize “roadkill”


3.       Rural/urban mix

- Coexistence of agriculture/urban areas

- Agricultural Land Reserve/Right to Farm Act

- Pesticide use and other farm operations

- Air quality

- Fencing

- Noxious weed control


4.       Wildland/urban interface fire hazard

- Recent extreme example of Okanagan Mountain Park Fire

- Combustibility of building materials

- Design and layout of development

- control of vegetative fuels which surround structures and developments

- Fires can spread both ways



-    Jurisdictional conflicts (OCP vs. provincial legislation (Right to Farm Act, Noxious Weed Control Act, Pesticide Control Act. etc.)

-    Regional, provincial and federal government policies may impinge



There are eight topics to cover:


     - Parks and facilities

     - Road-end development

     - Boat launches

     - Parklands and trails


     - Lakeshore preservation/access

     - Wildlife conservation/corridors

     - Rural/urban mix

     - Wildland/urban interface fire hazard



Participation should be:

     - Balanced

     - Respectful

     - Positive

     - Forward-thinking

     - Concise

     - Creative

We are here to come up with positive solutions for the community as a whole. This forum is not the place to come and air your complaints. There are a lot of people and a limited amount of time so following the discussion parameters will ensure that everyone will have a chance to be heard. Everyone was asked to stick to the topic as noted in the Summary for Discussion. This brainstorming session can be a very creative time, some ideas may not seem feasible at the time but may tigger thoughts on other subjects for discussion.


8.      DISCUSSION TIME – Topics of Parks & Recreation and Environment

PARKS AND RECREATION open for discussion from the floor.

Question posed to begin discussion: Who are we looking for the parks for – residents or outsiders?

Christina: Parks will be for everybody. After upgrading Coral Beach Park the boat launch is totally over-loaded.

Joanne: Are there any ideas where they could be located?

      - Gable Road access?

Lance: C & R have focused on the Gable Road access for a boat launch. Also noted that Coral Beach boat launch is a hazard.


Joanne: Is there enough parks in the area?


Daphne: At the South end of Coral Beach Road there is a little turn around there, can a park go in there?

- There is no development planned to go in here, most people want to leave it as it is.

Trying to address the concern of the Coral Beach facility to take the stress off this park by enhancing other road-end areas.  Do we want to create for space for more parks? Observation has been that the Coral Beach improvements have also increased the traffic. Kopje Park is underutilized, is it because of location? Probably because there is no boat launch, no beach, no dock or wharf for kids to use. Beach is all rocks.

Mike: Use to be a boat owner, no longer is. Look at enhancing other boat launching areas. Find some other useable boat launches without destroying the area. Lake Country itself needs more boat launching areas. Enhancements may just mean some garbage receptacles. Also recommending that if a ramp is put in it does not have to be made into a park. Noting also that Kopje Park is underutilized.

Ray: People do not realize that at the North end of Coral Beach Road there is a little park area. Could we use a dog park? Also notes that the South end of Coral Beach Road is underutilized.


Joanne: How many people support having more boat launches? Overwhelming YES.


Lance: On the corner of Terrace View and Carrs Landing Road on the Northwest corner there is a fair sized flat piece of land. Good location for a community building or level-playing field if the community wanted it. Again it leaves the Kopje field vacant.


Joanne: How many support the introduction of a recreation centre or community facility being built in the Carrs Landing area?  7 opposed.


Dave: Centralized would not be considered on the Terrace View Road area, as Carrs Landing begins from Oceola. Should we consider upgrading the facilities we already have? Such as the Fire Hall.

Christine: It would be wiser and more financially viable to upgrade existing facilities and making it accessible to all four corners of the community.

Mark: Any other comments or questions regarding parklands and trails?

Bill: Has noticed a bit of a rudimentary trail at Juniper Cove, it would be nice to connect it to the Allison path with a foot path.

Joanne: Any other questions regarding trails? NO


How many would like to maintain the existing land as it is now and protect it?


Karen: We must be careful to try and preserve these public lands and designated parks should be protected from development. We need to protect parks from development, as money tends to talk and bend existing bylaws.

Bill: Are we talking about lake access parks?

Mark: Development of road ends as property, making it more suitable for public access. Currently vacant pieces of property are being used as dump sites.

Bill: Okanagan basin study was conducted 30 years ago and 90% of the public access has been obscured. He agrees that they should be preserved and protected and provided with proper signage and receptacles.

Mark: But only as needed


Joanne: If we talk about the appropriate amount of development and access, who agrees. YES


Mark: The trail network is a work in progress. The Glacier Glade has been turned down, this is the area above Barkley Road, politics have taken a role in it and it may therefore be difficult to lease.

Bill: Noted that there is no road access to the Boundary Area at the north end of Juniper Road to the private road and beyond the “big house”. Its’ beach access is from the water.

Joanne: Any last comments to make? Use your comment form if you have any further comments, hand them in to me at the end of  the meeting.

Lance: What about a dog park? What do others think?

      - Who is going to enforce it?

      - All other parks are not dog friendly. Who would consider Coral Beach North as a dog park?

      - No objections as long as the users are respectful.

Joanne: How many would agree? 4 opposed.



Open for discussion on the floor. Any comments?

Bill: Likes to see it but orchardists don’t.

Joanne: Interface of the residents and orchrdists.

- Certain groups table some of these developments, we need to sit down and give it serious consideration. Believe that it can be maintained. Should this be recommended in the plan? Should we allow for wildlife corridors? In gulleys on the land? It is awesome that the deer are wondering around! Love that! What can we do to preserve that part of the ambience?

Dave: We could put corridors in between some of the orchards. That would take the pressures off of the deer. Animals get hung up on these fences. Allow a 15 foot setback, the municipality should probably could provide a concession, and for an extra row of fencing. Give people on Barkley Road access.

Rod: Wildlife is trapped. Fencing when designed like the wildlife fencing along the Connector allows for one way gates.


Joanne: How can we minimize our impact on the wildlife in this area?


Rural/urban mix. As the areas become more urban there is a real need to discuss the rural agricultural mix. Pesticide use, open burning etc. What can we as a community do to prevent some of these conflicts?

Ray: Burning is not tolerated by asthmatics, there shouldn’t be any burning, including in wood burning fireplaces. Air purity is in jeopardy. Vernon cannot burn anymore. Why can’t we stop? We should implement more stringent burning bylaws.

Mike: We should take a good look at eliminating burning altogether. We really don’t need to burn we should be chipping and putting it back into the land.

Joanne: How many support a burning ban? 10 YES

-A clean air committee supports chipping. Granting the use of chippers for the orchardists to use to put chips back into the orchard. Pruning can be taken to the landfill free of charge.

Rod: A gradual phasing in of a burning plan, time is needed to implement these changes.

Bill: We need to help out the orchardists, the Traditional Farm Practice allows for burning, and is protected by the BC laws. If we can come up with an alternative they may adopt a change easier.

What about pesticides and fertilizers that find their way into our environment?

Don: We are what we eat and drink. If we are eating, drinking and breathing pesticides over time we suffer.

Ray: This is a very complex issue, some pesticides are harmless, some not, an expert would be needed to look into it. Need to know what the truth is.

Christine: One problem is the burning. Others in other areas also have problems with air quality. Implementation of chipping as soon as possible. When they are using toxic sprays we don’t know what they are using. We need to know when they are spraying and what they are spraying. Communication is essential.

Linda: Lives behind an orchard. When the orchardist is working he/she is covered head to toe while spraying the crops and she is in her garden across the street???

Lance: There is not a lot of good reasons to burn anymore, chipping works well, other than when there are huge amounts of orchard waste to burn. Pesticides on a large-scale basis, if consumers didn’t mind a blemish on their product this would be helpful. Perfect fruit production is a result of pesticide use.

Joanne: Any further comments to share can be discussed with the focus group representatives during the break.


9.      BREAK 8:20pm – 8:30pm




-     Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering, and focus group members.

      - Potable Water

                  - Standard of operations for entire area

                  - Acquire systems/maintenance and operations by DLC

                  - Link systems

                  - Ensure fireflow standards are met

                  - Ensure long-term supply                     

      - Sewer Systems

                  - Ensure quality standards of existing systems

                  - Stay abreast of new developments in industry

                  - Promote additional satellite systems

                  - Maintain system density policy

      - Stormwater Drainage

                  - Need for drainage master plan

                  - Developers and private builders responsible for own drainage requirements

                  - Where possible, create holding ponds

      - Roads

                  - Ensure current transportation policy meets needs for community

                  - Improve CLR in areas of dangerous curves and narrow sections

                  - Bypass may be desired but costs may be prohibitive

                  - Access for emergency personnel


      - Waste Removal

                  - Continue removal of solid waste to Glenmore Landfill site

                  - Promote recycling/composting

                  - Be vigilant in discouraging local (illegal) dumping

      - Emergency Services

                  - Fire department – standards and vigilance in reducing wild land/urban interfacing risks

                  - Policing requirements

                  - Ambulance service

                  - Local bylaw enforcement requirements and standards

      - Other Issues

                  - Education

                  - Public Transportation

                  - Social Services

                  - Any other ????


Comments and notes during presentation:

Many drinking water systems operating in the community, one that is operated by the province and another that is operated by the District. Common ownership would improve operating standards, and possible prices at the tap. Interconnection for some or all of these systems could improve the efficiency. Minimum standards may not be met in our plan area (ie hydrants)


Sewer sys: no systems are hooked up to the LC treatment plant. Satellite systems in place in some areas. Investigating if additional satellite sys are needed. May establish a better standard of operation. Recommended that dist of LC stays abreast of this.


Channeling of storm water. Being prepared for severe storm water, a drainage master plan should be prepared for this area. In order to determine a plan for development and preserving green spaces. Would be beneficial to our area. Should prevent unforeseen situations. Holding ponds should be built to eliminate contamination of drinking water.

Roads: major concern regarding safety. Only paved artery CL Road. An additional paved road could benefit community. Traffic will increase in future. Improve safety and additional entrance or exit . Additional development in North of us.  Refuse, currently a long term agreement is in place regarding the use of the n Glenmore landfill site. No changes are anticipated that we are aware of. Recycling and composting to reduce landfill waste.

Emergency service: duplication of other focus groups. Repetition be gently.

Fire safety. How to reduce the risk and eventually losses. It is recommended that other services be maintained. Other issues, looking at our plans. Looking at our issues to be included . Public input. Issue list to date has been developed. New items may have to be considered.


11.  LAND USE PRESENTATION BY CHUCK                  

-     Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering and focus group members.

                  - Rural/natural character

                  - Planned development that reflects community’s wants and needs

                  - Expanded community amenities



-     For the Coral Beach, Terrace View, and Juniper Cove areas, zoning is based on Central Okanagan Regional District zoning and includes RU ALR, RU1, RU2, RU3, RU4, RU5, R1



Graphic was displayed on overhead projector



-     Examples of Permitted RU ALR RU1 AND RU2 uses:

      - Hog, beef and mink operations

      - Poultry farms intensive green houses

      - Wineries, commercial stables

      - Portable shake and sawmills

      - Orchards, vineyards, grazing

-     The rezoning of RU ALR land is very difficult



-     RU 3, RU 4, RU 5 AND R 1 zones are designated as country residential

-     Agricultural activities are permitted in these zones

-     Some restrictions

      - Those of “offensive nature”

-     It is possible to change the zoning of these areas



-     Most concerns revolve around increased residential densities


-     Existing permitted uses can have the same effect



-     Could result in intensive agricultural development on the large land tracts

      - Which may have high environmental and infrastructure impact

                  - 6-acre greenhouse

                  - Feed lot

                  - Gravel pit

-     Does not mean that everything will stay as it is now!



-     For higher residential density development to take place the existing lots may have to be rezoned

-     But the OCP states that any lot smaller than 1 ha (2.5 acres) must have a water and sewer utility

-     Council has taken the stand that the cost of these utilities must be borne by the users of that utility



-     Consider these statements

      - There will be future applications for development

      - Does residential development mean a major change in community look?

      - Current agricultural zoning does not necessarily mean open space populated by deer, gophers and grapes

      - Would you like to have a water and sewer utility?

      - 30% of the population in this neighborhood is 55 years and older so where do you want to live in 10 years?

      - Would you like a store, a pub, or other facility?



Graphics displayed on overhead projector.

      - Gated community

      - Lower density townhouses

      - Seniors facility

      - type of development layout options

      - waterfront developments

                  - pub

                  - Townhomes

                  - Lakefront condos



We’ve got to start thinking about this. We are in a position to develop the community in the way that we want.



-     Is to decide the future of our community

-     Provide direction to the DLC for our community

-     Be creative!

Our sector plan provides direction



-     Maintain rural/natural character

-     Ensure planned development that reflects community’s wants and needs

-     Explore the potential for expanded community amenities

-     By working together and exploring the options!!!



Joanne: At the end of these discussions she asked everyone to be ready to say what is the most important to them, related to the discussions tonight, ie: Are environmental issues, or low-density residential areas a concern for you. Is this what you want for your community?


Potable water: get all the systems together to make it one. One day it smells like bleach the next it smells like fish. Perhaps if we have someone looking after the system then we can have consistently good water. Supply is most likely going to be coming from The Lake.

Bill: The big lake must be kept clean, otherwise our system would be coming of of Beaver Lake and the other systems up there. Vernon system has to stay out of the lake.

Christine: Gets water directly from the lake. One efficient water system is important, Walkerton as an example. Should be done right.

Frits: question: If a common water system would be in place, it would mean purchasing out some of the owners. Cost could be significant. They see the water system as their income. Would you be willing to pay to obtain?

Would we be making somebody rich by allowing them to control the water.

How many willing to pay reasonable increase for a more reliable supply (water rates)?  Most opposed.

What about people on their own well water?  Would they support what is a reasonable increase? What do we pay now? One says $35.00 a month.

MIKE: Have lived both rural and city life styles. Harmonize price cost so that it is equal all across. Should be financed over a long period of time so that there is a very small increase. Cost of going on a rural system is more than he was expecting.

: Is this Carrs Landing only or the bigger area?

FRITS : Investigating possibilities at this point. No dollar figures at this point. How many different systems are involved?  Still under investigation. Still some work ahead in this area.

Would meters be a consideration? What is the general consensus for metering?

FRANK: comparative figures: $35 month is exceptionally cheap

3000 gallons in couple of days is average water consumption per household. Conservation measures can save huge amounts of money.

DON: given weather conditions in the OK. People should be metering.

Joanne: how many would accept metering. More than ½ agreed




Christine: Observed low-level water levels. Smell observed as offensive. Is there leaching into the lake. Not healthy. A septic field can only take so much. A common system that properties would connect to.

Where do they discharge? Up into the hills.

RAY: physician trained in Germany. Toured treatment facility, Eastern side should be able to pump sewage into a 3 level system where you would be able to drink the end product.

Lake has a turn over cycle of 80 years. Gives a long time for accumulation of sewage at the bottom of the lake. We have to be careful here.

RAY: this lake has not flipped. Biologists study water purity.  We don’t have worms that indicate sewage.

Frits: sewage eventually becomes dormant and does biodegrade, where something like mercury does not.

Don: tests drinking water. Always on the assumption of treating the water you’re going to drink. As population grows it becomes an increasing problem. A community drinking water system is best way to go. Boil water advisories frequent. BC has an increasing problem with good water. Made process in treating water. Must make a priority.




Storm drainage BILL: drainage goes into the lake. Outlets should go to settling ponds or storm sewers, as people don’t realize that everything goes to the lake.

Frits: allowing a pathway for large quantities of water to run down to the lake without harming homes or land areas. Ensure that anything that leaches off the land has an opportunity to settle before going to the Lake.

Daphne: road going to be black topped? Not aware of at this time. Has been widened.

Christine: CL Road band-aid techniques. Pressing concern is no emergency connection such as Barkley Road. Connect Lake Pine with Carrs Landing. Provisions need to be made.

Joanne: Some people feel when roads are improved then more traffic will result. People want CL road to be improved but how much? Just for people who live here or for other traffic.

Mark: only one route can causes problems.  Wind storm blue a tree down on either side of fire so emergency crews couldn’t get through.

Christine: Safety first. We cannot stop development.

Bill: straight road causes high-speed accidents. Winding road slow

Road wide enough for bicycles walkers.




Answer questions as posed to you as a way to stimulate discussion.

There will be future application for development Joanne: what kind of development would you accept in you neighbourhood and in CL in general.


MIKE: it’s a difficult question. We all realize that there is going to be development here. If I’m going to live here for a long time I would be unhappy to see high-density development.  We have to look at development it s going to continue. Lots of open land up above. Some increased water, better water, sewer, and transportation corridors. These all go hand in hand.

BILL: are we talking another  Kelowna Here? Why is it inevitable that we have to grow into a city. There are some places that don’t need to be developed. Why not just leave it the way it is? It’s been proven that crime is down, taxes stay down. We moved here from Kelowna to get out of it.

Joanne: how many agree with bill that we should cut it off here and not allow development

How many undeveloped lots are available in the area? Sector plan area: roughly 110-150. Do you say no to them that they cannot develop their lots. Just with people building on their lots that’s a form of development.

What about the agricultural land? Permitted use for IE; a feedlot. CHUCK

BILL disagrees,.

Christine: seen many developments, we are 14 km from the town center. Pig farms or feed lots or mink farms, needs a public meeting.

Joanne: accept development at some level seems to be the theme.

What can you live with?


Don: 3 years development . Setting a limit single standing houses. Infield that is there now, population grows. Can only see more increased pressure to infield more. You can put in an x number of houses.

; Land Use maps don’t show the 150 lots. Where are these lots. Unlimited growth doesn’t exist

Ray: The more rural should be limited to size, depending on the pockets of development.


What is high density? Lance: Average lot size

Preserving the present character of the neighbourhoods. Coral beach median .2 acre average lot size. CB

Being biggest density in CL.  Forest Hills 1 acre. Commonage 9.6 acres. Pixton ½ acre. Carrs land 1 acre.

Carbbonneau .6 acres.  This is high density related.

Are we talking specifically coral beach area?

Limited choices related to development. Developable land is zoned RU1 RU3.

What are some of the more developable land in your specific area, and what do want to see there?

In fill would allow for 3 homes.

Joanne: As a group how doe we define high-density? Does it mean townhouses?

There has never been a high-density proposal on Juniper Cove. Most were going to be RU4 . No intention to do that in future.


Joanne: does the group support the zoning that exists now? YES


What can you live with as far as densities?

Chuck: the difficulty is, we are trying to develop something to put into the sector plan.

DAVE: Lot size. How many lots in a larger area? Small lots with green area around these areas. As apposed to higher density.

High density means how many people

What do we need?

What’s is the next step in your residence when you retire. Do you want to continue living in CL.


MIKE; how many people you put into an area will impact on the road. Overall population growth, how far can you grow.


Someone on 15 acres, should be able to sell off parcels of their property so that they can remain on their property. There should be a choice to be able to subdivide and remain in your home for as long as you want without relocating after living and building there for so long.


People who are getting on would need access to ambulance service, library...


What’s the difference between a townhouse and a seniors residence.


Joanne: Are you looking for expanded amenities such as store...?


One of the reason’s we moved here because there is no store. Disturbing to everyone who lives here. 15 minutes to drive to amenities.

Little store in OK center hasn’t gotten any bigger, people will still go to bigger store.

Don’t’ need a hang out location such as a store.


What about a doctors office?

Joanne: survey identified that we wanted expanded amenities.

NO, is the overall comment for this.


No available transport to move a heart attack person out of the area.


What about business’ in the area LANCE. What if someone wanted to have a canoe building service here. Are there any problems with something like that. Manufacturing business with big workshop. Not high impact thing, is there any support for that.

Shop noises, putting out a furniture business.


Chuck: Putting in a sector plan is not easy, so what are you prepared to  forego.

BILL: doing something compatible with the resources in the area. I.e.; fruit drying. Resins from canoes not compatible

Christine: If it creates an impact on the environment or the neighbourhood then it’s not acceptable.

Frits: You allow a packing plant in one location how can you stop it from opening in another location.


9:55pm all ready to leave.


Joanne: pleased with all the input. Continue your involvement in the process.

MARK: focus groups are not closed everyone is welcome to participate in any of the focus groups.


MIKE: Web-site access to information of these meetings. For people that are away or part time residences.


Carrs Landing. org contains information. We do put updates here.


Publish any of the pertinent stuff that’s going out to the public.


What’s your most passionate plan for your community?


Jackie: prefer to live where there is a .5 or 1 acre of land. As opposed to next to a development of many.

Peace and quiet.


Bill: Left just the way it is, it will cost nothing/


Les: Sewer and water are one of the biggest things, before any community can get any bigger. The more crap we keep out of the water the better, with one or two plants treatment plants, some run better than others. Make sure their all run under a certain standard


Daphne: Lived here 25 years. It’s not a community as it used to be. Owners just part=time. It isn’t the same. Feels that when ready to retire out of CL they will not miss it. Renters don’t add anything to the community. As don’t part-timers.


Christine: lets not mess with the environment, air clean, drinking water good, burning out, no hasty development.


Ray 10 yr plan to regulate zoning bylaws, watching water quality.


Don: Have the Mayor come out and see how the people are here; if he could get a feeling for that then he would really understand.


He was at our meeting, heard everyone complaining.


That’s why we have these meetings and focus group leaders to take these to the council. Good opportunity to be community driven.


Joanne: this is really unique and very exciting, could be used as a model for future.


Larry: Never seen one done by community before. Could be very valuable if successful


Mike: There is a certain feel to the community that we like. Feel safe; we all agree that we need controlled water sewage and roads.

But how many people we want here and how to distribute them. Developing more land and lots by subdividing land personally doesn’t see large subdivisions coming in. Bring in a few lots over the year. It would change the area if a lot of people moved in (new).

The feel of the community would change, and put pressure on the limited amount of facilities we have here.


Kate: Can’t imagine any more large lots. This is a really nice community, like to see it stay that way. Water, sewer and roads improved.


Major improvements in fire protection if you exclude development. Will not happen. 

Steve: Nobody wants Glenmore here. 2.5 acre lots biggest lots. If you want a treatment plant you have to have lots to sustain it. Controlled development. Walkways and wildlife access.


Coral Beach the nicest thing to see is another wharf and beach for kids somewhere along Carrs Landing.


Joanne: thank you, has been a great session. Neighbours and friend in other neighbourhoods encourage them to come.

Spread the word. Look forward to hearing from you through the survey and the workshops.




Date:          October 16, 2003

Time:          7pm

Location:     Camp Arbuckle




Meeting be adjourned at 10:20pm