Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Rural land use control : an alternative to the standard zoning by-law Anderson, Thomas Robert 1985-12-31

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
UBC_1985_A8 A43_3.pdf [ 7.94MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0096361.json
JSON-LD: 1.0096361+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0096361.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0096361+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0096361+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0096361+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0096361 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0096361.txt
Citation
1.0096361.ris

Full Text

RURAL LAND USE CONTROL:. AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE STANDARD ZONING BY-LAW By THOMAS ROBERT ANDERSON B.A., The University of Victoria A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES THE SCHOOL OF COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY  OF BRITISH COLUMBIA  September, 1985 © Thomas Robert Anderson, 1985  In p r e s e n t i n g  t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of  requirements f o r an advanced degree at the  the  University  o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make it  f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r reference  and  study.  I  further  agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may department or by h i s o r her  be granted by the head o f representatives.  understood t h a t copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain  Department of Community and R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3  DE-6  (3/81)  October 7th,  1985  my  It i s thesis  s h a l l not be allowed without my  permission.  Date  thesis  written  ii ABSTRACT T h i s a n a l y s i s i s based on a s i t u a t i o n w h i c h has A r e a "G"  of u r b a n i z a t i o n  o f B r i t i s h Columbia.  The  spread  i n t o t h i s unzoned r u r a l a r e a i n the form o f a l a r g e  s u b d i v i s i o n c r e a t e d a l a n d use  block  c o n f l i c t w i t h e x i s t i n g a g r i c u l t u r a l uses.  R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t responded by p r o p o s i n g t o zone the e n t i r e e l e c t o r a l  area w i t h a standard  z o n i n g by-law.  t h i s idea saying the standard D i s t r i c t e v e n t u a l l y spot  R u r a l r e s i d e n t s r e a c t e d t o oppose  z o n i n g by-law i s t o o s t r i n g e n t .  zoned the p r o p e r t y  development t o t h a t w h i c h was the  in Electoral  w i t h i n the R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t o f Okanagan-Similkameen l o c a t e d i n  the s o u t h c e n t r a l s e c t o r of the P r o v i n c e  The  evolved  The  i n q u e s t i o n w h i c h l i m i t e d the  i n i t i a l l y proposed.  While t h i s measure s o l v e d  immediate problem, i t d i d l i t t l e t o p r e v e n t f u t u r e l a n d use  The  s i t u a t i o n just described  purpose o f t h i s s t u d y .  Regional  h i g h l i g h t s the two  conflicts.  i s s u e s w h i c h form  F i r s t , t h a t some form o f l a n d use  c o n t r o l i s neces-  s a r y i n r u r a l a r e a s because e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t s and  land users should  protected  l a n d uses; and  from p o s s i b l e c o n f l i c t i n g o r u n d e s i r a b l e  an a l t e r n a t i v e l a n d use  c o n t r o l should  the  be  second,  be d e v e l o p e d t o r e p l a c e t h e  standard  z o n i n g by-law w h i c h r e s i d e n t s are so s t r o n g l y opposed t o .  To o b t a i n more i n f o r m a t i o n l a n d use p l a n n i n g were asked why  on what the main p a r t i c i p a n t s i n r u r a l  t h i n k about the s t a n d a r d  t h e y f e l t the  z o n i n g by-law; R e g i o n a l P l a n n e r s  implementation o f the s t a n d a r d not be  zoning  was  important; and r e s i d e n t s were asked why  i t should  The  statements by b o t h groups were a n a l y z e d  for their validity.  by-law  implemented? Research  showed t h a t most o f the p l a n n e r s statements were t r u e but t h a t e x i s t i n g p r o v i n c i a l l a n d use is realized.  A n a l y s i s o f r e s i d e n t s statements showed t h a t some a r e based  on rumours and way  c o n t r o l s have more o f an e f f e c t on development t h a n  emotions r a t h e r than f a c t .  However, r e g a r d l e s s  of f a c t  i n w h i c h the p u b l i c p e r c e i v e a s i t u a t i o n i s important and must  the  be  considered.  An  i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e Development Permit, F l o o d P l a i n Zones, Spot  Zones, C o n t r a c t  Zones and C o n d i t i o n a l Zones as a l t e r n a t i v e s t o t h e  standard  iii z o n i n g by-law r e v e a l e d t h e i r p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s a l o n g w i t h their suitability  f o r implementation  i n E l e c t o r a l Area  "G".  I n c o r p o r a t i n g what had been l e a r n e d i n p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s , a R u r a l Maintenance By-law proposes  two  important d i f f e r e n c e s .  o f p r o h i b i t e d uses r a t h e r than t h e u s u a l p e r m i t t e d u s e s . p r o h i b i t e d uses i s f e l t t o b e t t e r s u i t t h e two b e i n g proposed.  is a  A list  zoning d i s t r i c t  list  of  concept  I t a l s o p r e s e n t s a more p o s i t i v e image o f a l a n d use  r e g u l a t i o n t o the p u b l i c . by way  First,  Second, f l e x i b i l i t y i s b u i l t  of a c o n d i t i o n a l zoning technique.  In t h i s way,  i n t o the  concept  developments w i l l  not be r e s t r i c t e d by t h e s t r i n g e n t r e g u l a t i o n s found i n a s t a n d a r d z o n i n g by-law.  I t w i l l a l s o encourage r e s i d e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e development  process of t h e i r area. at  And  finally,  i t w i l l r e q u i r e t h e p l a n n e r t o work  t h e g r a s s r o o t s l e v e l w i t h d e v e l o p e r s and r e s i d e n t s t o n e g o t i a t e t h e  b e s t p o s s i b l e development f o r f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s .  iv TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE L i s t of Tables L i s t of Figures L i s t of Appendices Acknowledgements  v  2.0  4.0  i  i x  1  Problem Statement Background Description of the Study  1 1 4  ANALYSIS OF STATEMENTS  5  2.1  6  2.2  3.0  i  viii  1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3  i  v  Regional Planners Statements 2.1.1 Without Zoning, the Character of the Neighborhood Can Not Be Preserved 2.1.2 Without Zoning, O f f i c i a l Settlement Plans Can Not Be Implemented 2.1.3 I t i s More Expensive t o Service Sprawl Development Than Clustered Development 2.1.4 Without Zoning, Development Can Take Place On Hazard Lands 2.1.5 Without Zoning, Residents Health and Safety Can Not Be Protected 2.1.6 Unzoned Areas Become Melting Pots For Undesirable Land Uses Residents Statements 2.2.1 Increased Governmental Regulation W i l l Result i n Loss o f the Rural L i f e s t y l e 2.2.2 Increased Bureaucracy Means Increased Taxes 2.2.3 Zoning Regulations Are Designed For Urban Areas and Do Not Consider Rural Values  6 22 27 30 36 42 49 49 52 56  REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVES TO THE STANDARD ZONING BYLAW  60  3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6  61 63 65 68 70 72  Development Permit Floodplain Zones Spot Zones Contract Zones Conditional Zones S u i t a b i l i t y of Alternatives i n E l e c t o r a l Area 'G*  AN ALTERNATIVE: 4.1 4.2 4.3  THE PROPOSED RURAL MAINTENANCE BYLAW  Introduction Factors A f f e c t i n g the Design General Overview of the A l t e r n a t i v e 4.3.1 Adndnistration of the A l t e r n a t i v e 4.3.2 Relationship of the A l t e r n a t i v e t o the Standard Zoning Bylaw  75 75 76 78 78 78  V  TABLE OF CONTENTS CX1JTINUED  4.4  4.5  5.0  D e t a i l e d /Analysis o f the A l t e r n a t i v e  80  4.4.1  P r o h i b i t e d Uses  80  4.4.2  F l e x i b i l i t y o f the A l t e r n a t i v e  83  4.4.3  The Standards  84  Method o f P r o c e s s i n g C o n d i t i o n a l Z o n i n g  94  4.6  P o l i c i n g the /Alternative  96  4.7  The U n c e r t a i n t y C r e a t e d By t h e A l t e r n a t i v e  97  4.8  Review t h e A l t e r n a t i v e  97  4.9  R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw  98  CONCLUSION  105  5.1  L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e Study  105  5.2  L i m i t a t i o n s o f the A l t e r n a t i v e  106  5.3  The V a l i d i t y o f t h e Proposed A l t e r n a t i v e  106  BIBLIOGRAPHY  APPENDICES  vi  LIST OF TABLES  A n a l y s i s o f Regional D i s t r i c t 1983 r e q u i s i t i o n f o r functions f o r each m u n i c i p a l i t y and e l e c t o r a l area. L i s t o f standards.  vii  LIST OF FIGURES 1.  Electoral Area 'G' Okanagan-Sirnilkarneen.  2.  Keremeos settlement p l a n area.  3.  Okanagan F a l l s settlement p l a n area.  4.  Locations o f undesirable land uses (Keremeos).  5.  Locations o f undesirable land uses (Okanagan F a l l s ) .  6.  Locations o f undesirable land uses (Okanagan F a l l s ) , w i t h zoning overlay.  7.  Electral T^rea 'F' w i t h i n Okanagan-Similkameen.  within  the  the  Regional  Regional  District  District  of  of  viii  APPENDICES  A.  R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t o f Okanagan-SirniLkarrieen b u i l d i n g bylaw n o .  688. B.  Example o f M i n i s t r y o f Environment f l o o d p l a i n  covenant.  C.  A g r i c u l t u r a l / R e s i d e n t i a l Zoning D i s t r i c t ' D ' z o n i n g bylaw n o . 100.  of E l e c t o r a l Area  D.  G e n e r a l requirements o f E l e c t o r a l /Area ' D ' z o n i n g b y l a w n o .  100. E.  F o r e s t r y - G r a z i n g Zoning D i s t r i c t , b y l a w n o . 100.  E l e c t o r a l Area  'D'  zoning  ix  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I w i s h t o extend my sincere g r a t i t u d e t o professor Brahm Weisman f o r h i s guidance, c r i t i c i s m and enthusiasm throughout the duration o f t h i s p r o j e c t . taken much longer.  Without i t the process would have  Appreciation i s a l s o extended t o B i l l Lane  f o r h i s assistance and E r i k K a r l s e n f o r h i s comments. Most o f a l l , I thank my w i f e , Yvonne, f o r without h e r patience, encouragement and being crazy enough t o go along w i t h t h i s adventure, I would never have survived.  S p e c i a l thanks a l s o  goes t o my daughters Brynn (2 1/2) and Megan (8 months) t o l e r a t i n g my absence while studying.  for  1  1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1  PROBLEM STATEMENT The  purpose  of  this  technique which w i l l controlling  designed  to  essentially 1.2  provide  undesirable  urbanization.  A t the respect  thesis rural  land  to  identify  residents  uses  same t i m e , the  is  with  resulting  this  a  land  a  suitable  from  use  the  control method  spread  of of  l a n d use c o n t r o l t e c h n i q u e w i l l  characteristics  of  an  environment  which  be is  rural.  BACKGROUND This  study w i l l  concentrate  on a  situation  r e s u l t o f the spread o f u r b a n i z a t i o n i n t o a r u r a l  w h i c h has  arisen  as  a  a r e a which i s not z o n e d .  A n example o f such a s i t u a t i o n i s when a s m a l l l o t r e s i d e n t i a l s u b d i v i s i o n is  developed adjacent  lots  are b u i l t  to  upon, t h e  normal a g r i c u l t u r a l  central  study w i l l  portion  District  of  concentrate described  adjacent  practices  of  farmer  as t h e  As t h e  residential  may r e c e i v e c o m p l a i n t s about h i s  s u c h as h i s  early  use o f  f o c u s on a s i t u a t i o n w h i c h has a r i s e n i n t h e  south  like.  British  C o l u m b i a , commonly d e s c r i b e d as t h e  Okaragan-Similkameen. on t h e  operation.  chemical sprays,  morning p l o w i n g and t h e This  an a g r i c u l t u r a l  south c e n t r a l  E l e c t o r a l Area  More  specifically,  sector of 'G .  the  Regional  study  the Regional D i s t r i c t  will  legally  T h i s E l e c t o r a l A r e a surrounds  1  the  V i l l a g e o f Keremeos and encompasses t h e u n i n c o r p o r a t e d a r e a s o f H e d l e y and Olalla.  (See F i g u r e  Electoral Agricultural  Area  1) 'G'  is  lands follow the  Keremeos C r e e k .  Pockets o f  land  the  lie  within  composed  of  a  variety  of  land  uses.  v a l l e y bottoms o f t h e Sijrdlkameen R i v e r residential,  unincorporated  commercial and l i g h t  areas  of  Hedley  and  industrial  and O l a l l a .  m a j o r i t y o f l a n d c o n s i s t s o f h i l l s i d e g r a z i n g and mountain r a n g e s .  The  3 Over t h e p a s t s e v e r a l y e a r s E l e c t o r a l A r e a  ' G ' , which i s not z o n e d ,  has e x p e r i e n c e d c o n f l i c t s r e s u l t i n g from t h e s p r e a d o f u r b a n i z a t i o n .  One  o f t h e most n o t a b l e o c c u r r e d i n 1980 when a d e v e l o p e r p r o p o s e d t o s u b d i v i d e a 360 a c r e p a r c e l i n t o north  of  the  operations. zoning  Village  of  Keremeos,  is  T h i s l a n d which i s l o c a t e d  adjacent  to  a number  of  just  ranching  The r a n c h e r s became concerned when they r e a l i z e d t h a t w i t h o u t  regulations,  parcels  10 a c r e h o l d i n g s .  these  as s m a l l as t h e  10  acre  lots  c o u l d be f u r t h e r  subdivided  into  P r o v i n c i a l L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t would a l l o w .  The  minimum p a r c e l s i z e a l l o w a b l e under t h e s e r e g u l a t i o n s i s 7,500 square f e e t if  connected t o  subdivision.  a  cormiunity  As a r e s u l t ,  Regional D i s t r i c t  water the  system,  ranchers  impose some form o f  which was  the  demanded t h a t  the  case  for  this  Board o f  l a n d use c o n t r o l t o p r o t e c t  the their  interests. The R e g i o n a l Board h a d ,  on p r e v i o u s o c c a s i o n s , p u t  forward p r o p o s a l s  t o r e s i d e n t s t o zone t h e E l e c t o r a l A r e a u s i n g a S t a n d a r d Z o n i n g Bylaw. each- o c c a s i o n r e s i d e n t s  responded e x p r e s s i n g t h e  want t o be r e s t r i c t e d b y such a s t r i n g e n t Undaunted responded t o t h a t the  by  the  the  meetings  of  ranchers request  for  wanting  a  set  of  c i t i n g the p l i g h t  comprehensive  that they  did  not  form o f l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n .  the  past,  the  Regional  Board  p r o t e c t i o n by once a g a i n p r o p o s i n g  e n t i r e E l e c t o r a l A r e a be z o n e d .  the Regional D i s t r i c t  view  On  A p u b l i c meeting was h e l d w i t h  o f t h e r a n c h e r s as t h e r e a s o n f o r  regulations  such  as  are  found  in  the  S t a n d a r d Z o n i n g Bylaw b e i n g p r o p o s e d . Unmoved b y t h e s i t u a t i o n o f a few, at  the  meeting  remained  vehemently  the majority o f those i n  opposed t o  the  imposition  attendance of  these  s t r i n g e n t regulations over the e n t i r e E l e c t o r a l a r e a . The r e s u l t was t h a t t h e R e g i o n a l Board adopted a z o n i n g bylaw t h e p a r c e l s i z e s i n t h e 360 a c r e b l o c k t o 10 a c r e s .  limiting  4 While  the  s i t u a t i o n which  as been d e s c r i b e d , ended t o  the  relative  s a t i s f a c t i o n o f t h e r a n c h e r s , t h e f a c t remains t h a t such s p o t z o n i n g i s a solution f o r preventing future a more i n d e p t h a n a l y s i s o f  l a n d use c o n f l i c t s w h i c h may a r i s e .  spot  z o n i n g as a  w i l l be u n d e r t a k e n i n a l a t e r  chapter,  is  a  normally  initiated  this,  it  This,  along w i t h the  courts  after  it  land use c o n t r o l  should  While  technique  be s a i d t h a t s p o t  s u b d i v i s i o n has be p r o p o s e d .  not  zoning  Because o f  can only l i m i t the developer t o the p a r c e l s i z e already proposed.  as  being  fact  that  spot  discriminatory  z o n i n g c a n be i n t e r p r e t e d  against  the  developer,  by  limits  the the  a p p l i c a b i l i t y o f t h i s t e c h n i q u e i n unzoned a r e a s . The s i t u a t i o n w i t h i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a Okanagan-Similkameen h i g h l i g h t s this  thesis;  Firstly,  that  the  the Regional D i s t r i c t  of  two i s s u e s w h i c h form t h e purpose  of  some form o f  'G' of  land use c o n t r o l i s necessary i n  r u r a l a r e a s because e x i s t i n g r e s i d e n t s and l a n d u s e r s s h o u l d be from  possible  alternative  conflicting  or  l a n d use c o n t r o l  undesirable  land  uses;  s h o u l d be d e v e l o p e d t o  protected  Secondly,  r e p l a c e the  an  Standard  Z o n i n g Bylaw w h i c h r e s i d e n t s a r e s o s t r o n g l y opposed t o . 1.3  DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY C h a p t e r two  participants Bylaw.  in  To t h i s  i s d e s i g n e d t o o b t a i n more i n f o r m a t i o n rural end,  land  use  zoning  think  about  the  and  statements  made by  residents  on why  the  the  i n E l e c t o r a l Area  validity.  In  other  when a p l a n n e r g i v e s a r e a s o n f o r t h e implementation o f a S t a n d a r d  Z o n i n g Bylaw,  are these simply stock r e p l i e s  E l e c t o r a l Area ' G ' ? against  Zoning  S t a n d a r d Z o n i n g Bylaw  s h o u l d n o t be implemented, w i l l be a n a l y z e d f o r t h e i r words,  Standard  main  statements by R e g i o n a l P l a n n e r s on why t h e y f e l t  i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f a S t a n d a r d Z o n i n g Bylaw was i m p o r t a n t 'G',  on what t h e  the  Or,  o r do t h e y a c t u a l l y a p p l y  on t h e o t h e r h a n d , when r e s i d e n t s make  implementation  of  the  Standard  Zoning  Bylaw,  in  statements are  their  5  r e a c t i o n s b a s e d on rumours and emotions o r on a s c e r t a i n a b l e  facts.  The r e s e a r c h r e q u i r e d i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e s e statements w i l l  involve  d e f i n i n g what p r o v i n c i a l and o r l o c a l l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n s now e x i s t i n unzoned a r e a s and a s s e s s i n g t h e i r Chapter Standard Permit,  three  will  Z o n i n g Bylaw. F l o o d p l a i n Zone,  e f f i c i e n c y and e f f e c t i v e n e s s .  investigate A  review  a  of  number  the  of  alternatives  literature  Spot Zone, C o n t r a c t  on t h e  to  the  Development  Zone and C o n d i t i o n a l  Zone  w i l l p r o v i d e i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e v a r i o u s d e f i n i t i o n s o f each a l o n g w i t h p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s . on t h e s u i t a b i l i t y  all  their  The c h a p t e r w i l l c o n c l u d e w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n  o f implementing t h e s e a l t e r n a t i v e s  as a l a n d use c o n t r o l  technique i n E l e c t o r a l Area ' G ' . I n c o r p o r a t i n g what has been l e a r n e d i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r s , Chapter four w i l l propose the  " R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw",  S t a n d a r d Z o n i n g Bylaw. rural  areas  of  a f f e c t i n g the  the  It  will  province  be  as an a l t e r n a t i v e  designed t o  besides E l e c t o r a l  design of t h i s alternative  be  applicable  Area  'G'.  and p r o c e d u r e s f o r  to  The its  to  the  other  factors amendment  w i l l be p r e s e n t e d . The  final  alternative  it  chapter proposes.  is  a  critical  review  of  this  A d i s c u s s i o n o f the v a l i d i t y  study  and o f  o f the  the  alternative  and how i t would be c o n s i d e r e d c o n c l u d e s t h e t h e s i s .  2.0  ANALYSIS OF STATEMENTS ON STANDARD ZONING This  chapter  standard  zoning  residents. asked t o  will bylaw  analyze by  and  validate  Regional  statements  Planners  and  Regional planners f o r the Reg. D i s t . o f list  their  reasons f o r  bylaw i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' .  the  implementation  Similarly,  made  about  the  Electoral  /Area  'G'  Ok.-Similkameen of  a standard  list  their  implemented.  r e a s o n s on why After  the  interviewing  standard the  zoning  r e s i d e n t s who h a d s t r o n g l y opposed  t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f z o n i n g a t t h e p u b l i c m e e t i n g , were i n t e r v i e w e d to  were  z o n i n g bylaw  regional  planners  and asked  s h o u l d not  and r e s i d e n t s  be of  6 E l e c t o r a l Area ' G '  #  t h e f o l l o w i n g statements  emerged.  R e g i o n a l P l a n n e r s Statements 1) Without z o n i n g , t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e neighbourhood c a n n o t be preserved. 2) Without z o n i n g , o f f i c i a l s e t t l e m e n t p l a n s can not be implemented. 3) I t i s more e x p e n s i v e t o s e r v i c e s p r a w l development t h a n c l u s t e r e d development. 4) Without z o n i n g , development can t a k e p l a c e on h a z a r d l a n d s . 5) Without z o n i n g , r e s i d e n t s h e a l t h and s a f e t y can not be p r o t e c t e d . 6) Unzoned a r e a s become m e l t i n g p o t s f o r u n d e s i r a b l e l a n d u s e s . Residents  Statements  1)  I n c r e a s e d governmental r e g u l a t i o n w i l l r e s u l t i n l o s s o f t h e r u r a l lifestyle. 2) I n c r e a s e d b u r e a u c r a c y means i n c r e a s e d t a x e s . 3) Z o n i n g r e g u l a t i o n s a r e d e s i g n e d f o r urban a r e a s and do not c o n s i d e r rural values. / a n a l y z i n g t h e s e statements w i l l , z o n i n g bylaw r e a l l y and on t h e of  on t h e one h a n d , show whether t h e  accomplishes what t h e  other hand,  it  further  subjects.  Electoral  Area  First,  'G'  are  r e g i o n a l planners say i t  w i l l v e r i f y whether  a s t a n d a r d z o n i n g bylaw a r e  valid.  the  r u r a l residents perceptions  and  land  use  second,  research project. whether their  2.1  readily  each o f t h e  governing  rationale  if  any,  exists.  statements h a s t h e p o t e n t i a l  for a  The scope o f t h e a n a l y s i s h e r e i s l i m i t e d t o  major  verifying  a s c e r t a i n a b l e evidence i s a v a i l a b l e t o support or d i s p r o v e  validity.  REGIONAL PLANNERS STATEMENTS  2.1.1  Without zoning, preserved.  t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e neighborhood  P r i o r t o examining t h i s statement, h a s t h e c o n t r o l over l a n d use i n B . C . 1867 the  regulations  the  f o r r u r a l l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n s beyond what c u r r e n t l y Examination o f  will,  T h i s r e s e a r c h w i l l a l s o c o v e r two  existing  described,  standard  a s s i g n e d powers t o t h e provincial  government  federal  under  it  can  not  be  i s e s s e n t i a l t o r e c o g n i z e who  The B r i t i s h N o r t h A m e r i c a A c t o f  government under S e c t i o n 91 and  Section  92.  With  respect  of  to  land,  7 Section turn,  92  (13)  assigns the a u t h o r i t y over  the provinces  can delegate  land t o the provinces.  specific  government b o d i e s o r government departments. this  section,  the delegation  of  specific  authority  to  In  subordinate  /As w i l l be seen throughout authority  over  land  through  p r o v i n c i a l s t a t u t e s h a s been common. The  Ministry  Terminology"  of  Lands,  bulletin,  Federal Acts presently  Parks  provides  a  and H o u s i n g ,  compilation  "Land  o f a l l p r o v i n c i a l and  i n force i n the province.  By n o t i n g a number o f  t h e s e A c t s and t h e powers c o n t a i n e d i n them t o e f f e c t be  seen t h a t  zoning regulations  Allocation  land use, i t  will  a r e n o t t h e o n l y ones c o n t r o l l i n g  land  use.  A)  E l e c t r i c a l Safety A c t -establishes province. used  t h e standards  for electrical  safety  S e c t i o n 5.2 s t a t e s t h a t no e l e c t r i c a l  unless  it  h a s been  inspected  by a  within  the the  equipment s h a l l b e  provincial  electrical  inspector. B)  Environment and Land Use A c t - g i v e s t h e P r o v i n c i a l C a b i n e t powers t o make o r d e r s and r e g u l a t i o n s to  deal  with  any matter  involving  l a n d u s e , as l o n g  as i t  acts  w i t h i n the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l j u r s i d i c t i o n o f the province. C)  F i r e Services A c t -authorizes pertaining Electoral Problems  t h e L i e u t e n a n t Governor i n C o u n c i l t o make to fire  safety  within  the province.  Area  ' G ' , the administration  arise  c o n c e r n i n g t h e Chimney,  Furnace R e g u l a t i o n ( B . C . Reg. 492/59).  regulations  With respect  becomes somewhat Fireplace,  to  tenuous.  Smokepipe and  Section 3 o f the regulation,  r e q u i r e s t h a t persons o b t a i n a permit p r i o r t o the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f such s t r u c t u r e s . states  that  S e c t i o n 59 ( 2 ) ( h ) ( i ) ( i )  one o r more p e r s o n s  o f the F i r e Service A c t  i n an area  can be designated as  8 responsible f o r enforcing these While  in  inspector i s  most  parts  regulations.  of  responsible for  the  province,  Therefore,  Protection Problems  District  arise  protection  over  area.  Canadian  regulation.  it  and s t r u c t u r e s administered  the  administration discussion  was  Police  F i r e Commission s t a f f  busy t o e n f o r c e t h e i r  w i t h i n t h e Keremeos  by  the  of  with  are  local  fire  Fire  chief.  lands outside the British  learned t h a t the  Mounted  building  i s not governed b y a b u i l d i n g  are  In  Commission s t a f f , Royal  lands  area  e n f o r c i n g the A c t , E l e c t o r a l Area ' G '  h a s no b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r because i t bylaw.  the  Columbia  fire Fire  l o c a l detachment o f  left  with  enforcing  the  this  concede t h a t t h e p o l i c e a r e  too  r e g u l a t i o n s and t h a t u s u a l l y no one e n f o r c e s  them i n s i t u a t i o n s such as t h i s . D)  Forest Act - g i v e s the  P r o v i n c i a l C a b i n e t powers t o modify e x i s t i n g and f u t u r e  f o r e s t t e n u r e agreements t o o b t a i n more e f f e c t i v e E)  f o r e s t management.  Greenbelt A c t - g o v e r n s t h e p r o v i n c i a l government a c q u i s i t i o n o f p r i v a t e reservation  of  provincial  crown  lands  which  are  l a n d s and  suitable  for  p r e s e r v a t i o n as g r e e n b e l t s . F)  Heritage Conservation A c t -gives  the  council)  Minister  the  right  or to  a  designated  designate,  person  protect  or  body  (municipal  and c o n s e r v e  heritage  properties. G)  Highway A c t - s e c t i o n 401 15/78  o f B . C . R e g u l a t i o n 822/74 amended by B . C .  o f t h e Highways A c t ,  requires that a l l  from t h e r o a d r i g h t - o f - w a y  b y 15 f e e t .  by  takes  a  z o n i n g bylaw,  which  Regulation  s t r u c t u r e s be s e t back  U n l e s s an a r e a i s governed  precedence o v e r  this  provincial  9 regulation,  t h e s e t b a c k i s e n f o r c e d b y t h e Department o f Highways.  Land A c t -regulates  t h e d i s p o s i t i o n o f p r o v i n c i a l crown l a n d and e s t a b l i s h e s  p r o c e d u r e s by which p r i v a t e  i n d i v i d u a l s can a c q u i r e and use p u b l i c  lands. N a t i o n a l Parks A c t -gives  powers  to  the  Federal  Cabinet  w i t h i n a n a r e a d e s i g n a t e d as a n a t i o n a l  to  regulate  all  activities  park.  Park A c t - g i v e s powers use,  to  development,  the  P r o v i n c i a l Cabinet t o c o n t r o l the  exploration,  or extraction  occupancy,  of a natural  resource  on o r i n a p a r k . Range A c t -gives  the  Provincial  Cabinet  power  to  regulate  the  grazing  of  a n i m a l s o r c u t t i n g o f hay on p r o v i n c i a l crown l a n d s . Regional Parks A c t - g i v e s a r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t power t o a c q u i r e ,  d e v e l o p and aclminister  r e g i o n a l p a r k s and t r a i l s . Water A c t - a b o l i s h e s the p r i n c i p l e o f r i p a r i a n r i g h t s  h e l d under  common law  and h a s v e s t e d t h e p r o p e r t y i n and t h e r i g h t t o u s e a l l water i n any "stream"  in  the  e s t a b l i s h e d under  province;  except  where p r i v a t e  rights  have  been  l i c e n c e s i s s u e d o r a p p r o v a l s g i v e n under t h i s  or  some former A c t . W h i l e t h e p r e c e d i n g A c t s do c o n t r o l l a n d u s e , t h e i r is  primarily  properties. privately  limited  to  The f o l l o w i n g  provincial  crown  lands  legislation pertains  owned l a n d and t h u s a f f e c t s  a greater  to  or  application particular  the c o n t r o l  number o f  of  people.  10 F o r t h i s r e a s o n , a more i n d e p t h a n a l y s i s w i l l be p r e s e n t e d . Municipal Act -the  Municipal  administrative This  includes  Act  delegates  extensive  legislative  powers t o t h e m u n i c i p a l i t i e s and r e g i o n a l the  power  to  control  zoning,  and  districts.  subdivision,  and  building.  i)  Zoning Division  (3),  S e c t i o n 716  (1)  of  the A c t  states  that Council  may b y a z o n i n g bylaw: (a) d i v i d e a l l o r p a r t o f t h e a r e a o f t h e m u n i c i p a l i t y zones and d e f i n e each zone e i t h e r b y map, p l a n d e s c r i p t i o n , o r any c o m b i n a t i o n o f them;  into or  (b) r e g u l a t e t h e use o f l a n d , b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s , i n c l u d i n g t h e s u r f a c e o f w a t e r , w i t h i n t h e z o n e s , and t h e r e g u l a t i o n s may be d i f f e r e n t f o r d i f f e r e n t zones and f o r d i f f e r e n t uses w i t h i n a z o n e , and f o r t h e purposes o f t h i s p a r a g r a p h the power t o r e g u l a t e i n c l u d e s t h e power t o p r o h i b i t p a r t i c u l a r uses i n s p e c i f i e d z o n e s . (c) r e g u l a t e t h e s i z e , shape and s i t i n g o f b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s w i t h i n t h e z o n e s , and t h e r e g u l a t i o n s may be d i f f e r e n t f o r d i f f e r e n t zones and w i t h r e s p e c t t o d i f f e r e n t uses w i t h i n a z o n e ; (d) without l i m i t i n g the g e n e r a l i t y o f paragraph (b), r e q u i r e t h e owners o r o c c u p i e r s o f any b u i l d i n g i n a zone t o provide off s t r e e t p a r k i n g and l o a d i n g space f o r the b u i l d i n g , and may c l a s s i f y b u i l d i n g s and d i f f e r e n t i a t e and d i s c r i r o i n a t e between c l a s s e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e amount o f space t o be p r o v i d e d , and may exempt any c l a s s o f b u i l d i n g o r any b u i l d i n g e x i s t i n g a t t h e time o f a d o p t i o n o f t h e bylaw from any requirement o f t h i s p a r a g r a p h . It  can be seen t h a t t h e power o f  extensive.  However,  has, t o t h i s time, (ii)  a z o n i n g bylaw c a n be  the Regional D i s t r i c t  of  quite  Okanagan-Similkameen  not o p t e d t o use t h i s i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ;  Subdivision Division  (4)  of  the  Act  states  regulate the subdivision o f l a n d . how t h e  lands  to  be  that  C o u n c i l may b y  S e c t i o n 729  s u b d i v i d e d c a n be  (1)  to  regulated.  bylaw  (14)  perscribe  The  Regional  11 D i s t r i c t o f Okariagan-Sirnilkameen S u b d i v i s i o n Bylaw No. 300 s u b d i v i s i o n s w i t h i n the e n t i r e r e g i o n a l d i s t r i c t Area (1)  'G'. of  including Electoral  The powers v e s t e d i n t h i s bylaw a r e l i m i t e d .  the  bylaw  states  that  "where a  regulates  parcel  is  Section 4  served by  a  corrorunity water system b u t n o t a community sewer system, t h a t p a r c e l s h a l l n o t b e s m a l l e r t h a n 9,000 square f e e t " . S e c t i o n 4 (2) not  within  the  improvement source  of  r e q u i r e s t h a t e v e r y p r o p o s e d s u b d i v i s i o n which i s boundaries  district potable  of  an  irrigation  district  or  an  s h a l l e s t a b l i s h t h a t each p a r c e l has a p r o v e n  water,  of  which  the  s o u r c e must be c a p a b l e  of  p r o v i d i n g 500 i m p e r i a l g a l l o n s o f water p e r p a r c e l p e r day. Section 4 more  than  protection than  500  (3)  two  requires  additional  district, feet  t h a t any new s u b d i v i s i o n which parcels  and  which  is  within  creates a  fire  s h a l l p r o v i d e f i r e h y d r a n t s w h i c h are no more  from t h e  proposed p a r c e l s .  Finally,  Section 4  (4)  s t a t e s t h a t e v e r y proposed p a r c e l i n a s u b d i v i s i o n which i s w i t h i n a specified  sewer  area  shall  be  connected t o  the  sanitary  sewerage  system i n t h a t a r e a . Section  729  (1)  to  (14)  of  the  a u t h o r i t y which c o u n c i l s may l e g i s l a t e  Municipal  Act,  details  i n a s u b d i v i s i o n bylaw.  powers l e g i s l a t e d i n t h e bylaw d e s c r i b e d above a r e l i m i t e d .  the The  This  is  not t o s a y t h a t s u b d i v i s i o n s a r e t o t a l l y u n r e g u l a t e d because what i s not  covered  under  the  s u b d i v i s i o n bylaw  p r o v i n c i a l Local Services A c t .  is  regulated  The L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t , which  be d e s c r i b e d l a t e r ,  i s the b a s i c s u b d i v i s i o n regulatory  in  A  the  province.  local  under  government  the will  legislation  s u b d i v i s i o n bylaw  simply  p r o v i d e s more s p e c i f i c r e g u l a t i o n t o adapt a s u b d i v i s i o n t o an a r e a s particular  needs and c o n c e r n s .  12 iii)  B u i l d i n g Regulations D i v i s i o n (5)  the  health,  building (a)  to  safety  and p r o t e c t i o n  regulations  (k)  i n the  empowers t h e  supplementary  example,  of  may be a d o p t e d .  made under  this  for  adopt  S e c t i o n 734 S e c t i o n 739  c o u n c i l t o adopt r e g u l a t i o n s  regulations  regulations  p e r s o n s and p r o p e r t y ,  form o f a b u i l d i n g b y l a w .  l e g i s l a t e what r e g u l a t i o n s  specifically with  o f the M u n i c i p a l A c t s t a t e s t h a t c o u n c i l may,  consistent  division.  For  found i n t h e E l e c t r i c a l S a f e t y A c t , Gas A c t o r  F i r e S e r v i c e s A c t can be a d o p t e d . Here a g a i n ,  the R e g i o n a l  District  of  Okanagan-Similkameen h a s  chosen n o t t o adopt a b u i l d i n g bylaw f o r E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' . (0)  A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission A c t The R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s , to  as t h e  Agricultural  preserving  farmland  and  of  within  Agricultural  agricultural  potential  non-agricultural  and o t h e r  9,  1979,  more commonly  Land Commission A c t ,  encroachment the  Chapter  s e r v e s as a method  agricultural  development.  Land  Reserve  referred  lands  The  (ALR)  from  use o f is  the  the  land  limited  uses t h a t do not d i m i n i s h t h e  of  to  capability  of  t h e l a n d t o produce c r o p s . Generally,  lands w i t h  a  soil  capability  rating  i n c l u s i v e l y on t h e 7 c l a s s Canada Land I n v e n t o r y (CT.T) capability  maps  Nonetheless,  are  lands  included  suitable  in  for  the  Agricultural  grazing,  such as  of  1  s h o u l d b e noted t h a t t h e CLI  Land  Reserve.  found w i t h  Varying  s o i l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system i s  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s make i t  agricultural  practices  and  soil  areas.  used as a g e n e r a l guide i n d e c i d i n g which l a n d s h o u l d be i n the reserve.  4  agricultural  r a t e d as c l a s s e s 5 and 6, have a l s o been i n c l u d e d i n c e r t a i n It  to  only land  climate  i m p o s s i b l e t o say e x a c t l y what s o i l c l a s s e s  a r e i n c l u d e d and which a r e  not.  13 The A g r i c u l t u r a l Regional  District  February  13,  Agricultural measured. over  Land Reserve f o r  of  1974.  Okanagan-Similkameen, The  total  Land Reserve  for  However, when t h e  213,600  acres  or  E l e c t o r a l Area  7.8  area  of  Electoral  was land  Area  ' G ' and  designated now  'G'  l a n d r e s e r v e s were f i r s t percent  of  the  entire  on  within  has  the  the  not  been  established, area  of  the  R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t was i n the l a n d r e s e r v e . All are  l a n d s d e s i g n a t e d as a g r i c u l t u r a l  subject  to  Commission A c t .  regulations S e c t i o n 15  contained (2)  on t h e c o n s t i t u t e n t  in  o f the A c t  the  maps  Agricultural  Land  states;  (2) no p e r s o n s h a l l use a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d f o r any purpose o t h e r t h a n farm u s e , except as p e r m i t t e d b y t h i s A c t , t h e r e g u l a t i o n s o r an o r d e r o f t h e Commission, on terms t h e Commission may impose. Thus,  any landowner wanting  agricultural applicant the  must a p p l y t o  to the  use the  the  under S e c t i o n 12  land while s t i l l (1)  a use o t h e r  Land (Commission f o r  may a p p l y under S e c t i o n 20  use o f  land f o r  (1)  than  approval.  An  f o r p e r m i s s i o n t o change  remaining i n t h e  t o e x c l u d e t h e l a n d from t h e  land reserve or reserve.  Lands excepted from t h e s e r e g u l a t i o n s a r e l a n d s which meet t h e requirements  of  Section  19  of  the  Land  Commission A c t ,  which  states; 19. (1) R e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e use o f a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d do not a p p l y t o l a n d t h a t , on December 21, 1972, was, b y s e p a r a t e c e r t i f i c a t e o f t i t l e i s s u e d under t h e Land R e g i s t r y A c t , l e s s than 2 acres i n area. (2) The r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e use o f a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d do n o t a p p l y t o l a n d l a w f u l l y used f o r o t h e r t h a n a farm u s e , e s t a b l i s h e d and c a r r i e d on c o n t i n u o u s l y f o r a t l e a s t 6 months immediately p r i o r t o December 21, 1972 u n l e s s and u n t i l (a) t h e use i s changed, o t h e r t h a n without permission o f the ccmrussion: (b) an enactment made p r o h i b i t s the u s e ; o r  after  to  December  (c) permission f o r the use g r a n t e d enactment i s withdrawn o r e x p i r e s .  farm u s e ,  21,  1972,  under  an  14 Lands w i t h i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' t h a t f a l l w i t h i n S e c t i o n 19 o f t h e A c t and a r e  e x c e p t e d from t h e Land Commission A c t as w e l l as  l a n d s w h i c h a r e n o t s u i t a b l e f o r a g r i c u l t u r e and a r e n o t w i t h i n t h e Land R e s e r v e , a r e n o t s u b j e c t t o any l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission A c t . P o l i c i n g o f lands w i t h i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l land r e s e r v e i n B . C . h a s always been a p r o b l e m .  Land Commission s t a f f  have never h a d t h e number o f s t a f f As  a  result,  information building  they  on  rely  inspectors  because  they  are  travel  to  needed t o do t h e i r own p o l i c i n g .  heavily  infractions.  In  noted all  confess t h a t they  on  Regional  particular,  as  parts  the of  most the  Districts  for  regional  district  consistent  source,  district  looking  for  b u i l d i n g i n f r a c t i o n s on a weekly b a s i s . According agreement  to  between  the  Regional D i s t r i c t s  p o l i c i n g the A . L . R . this  service.  Districts  to  there  and t h e  i s no w r i t t e n  L a n d Commission on  Nor i s t h e r e any f e e p a i d t o t h e D i s t r i c t s  T h e r e i s , however,  retain  application  Land Commission s t a f f ,  the  the  entire  for  an arrangement whereby R e g i o n a l  application  fee  required  Land Corrtnission as remuneration  for  for the  an part  they p l a y i n the process. In greater  areas,  p r o b l e m , because t h i s  b u i l d i n g bylaw, spot  such as E l e c t o r a l /Area ' G ' , p o l i c i n g poses an even E l e c t o r a l Area i s not  covered by  t h u s t h e r e a r e no b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r s a v a i l a b l e  infractions.  As a r e s u l t ,  t h e L a n d Commission must r e l y  o t h e r s o u r c e s f o r i n f o r m a t i o n on i n f r a c t i o n s t o t h e A c t .  a to on  At best,  s o u r c e s such a s f i e l d i n s p e c t o r s from o t h e r government a g e n c i e s and the  general p u b l i c ,  supply i n t e r m i t t a n t  information.  The r e a s o n  government i n s p e c t o r s do not l i k e t o r e p o r t i n f r a c t i o n s i s The f i r s t  i s that i t  i s not t h e i r  job.  Secondly, i t  twofold.  may j e o p a r d i z e  15 their  r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e p e r s o n committing t h e i n f r a c t i o n .  The  p u b l i c i s an i n c o n s i s t e n t s o u r c e o f i n f o r m a t i o n f o r two reasons as well.  Firstly,  like.  many p e o p l e w i l l o n l y r e p o r t n e i g h b o r s t h e y do not  Secondly,  entire  areas  may  be  so  government r e g u l a t i o n t h a t no one w i l l r e p o r t  adamently  against  any i n f r a c t i o n s  for  f e a r o f government imposing more r e g u l a t i o n s on them. The enforcement powers o f t h e Land Commission a r e found under Section  34  believes  of  the  present  or  A c t which future  states  activity  that or  "where  use o f  t h e Commission  land  in  the  land  r e s e r v e may contravene t h i s A c t , t h e Cortmission (a) may o r d e r t h e owner o r occupant t o r e f r a i n from t h e a c t i v i t y o r use f o r a p e r i o d n o t e x c e e d i n g 60 d a y s , and t o make w r i t t e n o r o r a l s u b m i s s i o n s t o t h e commission as i t requires to determine any likely impairment of the a g r i c u l t u r a l c a p a b i l i t y o f the land; (b) may a p p l y t o the Supreme C o u r t f o r an o r d e r r e s t r a i n i n g t h e owner o r occupant from commencing o r c o n t i n u i n g t h e a c t i v i t y o r use o f l a n d i n c o n t r a v e n t i o n o f t h i s A c t , the r e g u l a t i o n s o r an o r d e r o f t h e c o m m i s s i o n . " S e c t i o n 35 o f t h e A c t e s t a b l i s h e s t h e e x t e n t and t h e powers o f t h e Land Commission t o impose a p e n a l t y h a s been determined t h a t an a c t i v i t y , impair a g r i c u l t u r a l c a p a b i l i t y ,  upon landowners where  o r use o f  l a n d would  it  likely  o r where no s u b m i s s i o n i s made,  the  commission may, b y o r d e r (a) impose on t h e owner o r occupant t h e terms f o r o r use o f t h e l a n d i t c o n s i d e r s a d v i s a b l e ; o r  activity  (b) r e q u i r e t h a t t h e l a n d be r e s t o r e d t o i t s former c o n d i t i o n as a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d , t o t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n o f the commission; o r (c)  r e q u i r e a bond t o ensure c o m p l i a n c e .  I n t h e c a s e o f d e f a u l t under p a r a g r a p h ( b ) , t h e expromission may p e r f o r m t h e work, and t h e c o s t i s a debt due t o t h e commission b y t h e owner o r occupant i n d e f a u l t . In  d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h Land Commission s t a f f  i t was l e a r n e d t h a t  t h e y o n l y seek t o have t h e l a n d r e t u r n e d t o i t s o r i g i n a l s t a t e t h e minimum expense t o t h e l a n d owner and t h e Commission.  at  16 A  particular  case  is  found  in  E l e c t o r a l Area  December o f 1981 t h e R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t  'G  1  where  informed t h e Land Ccrardssion  t h a t a landowner was s t o r i n g wrecked c a r s on a g r i c u l t u r a l contrevention informed  of  of this  Section  15  by  Land Commission and he  under S e c t i o n 20 (1) for  the  storage  application agriculture 1983,  of  Act.  The in  cars.  that  and t h a t t h e  the  land  had  high  the  restore  turn  In  letter  the property  to  w h i c h c o u r t a c t i o n would be t a k e n . property w i t h i n the  to its  the  original  this for  January o f  staff  to  view their 1983,  g i v i n g him 2  condition  The landowner  was  property  so, i n February, landowner  in  applied  landowner h a d c o m p l i e d w i t h  The landowner had not c o m p l i e d ,  Land Commission s e n t a  months t o  landowner  capability  c a r s s h o u l d be removed.  see whether  land  The Land Commission d e n i e d  t h e Land Commission r e q u e s t e d R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t  decision.  his  the  f o r p e r m i s s i o n t o c o n t i n u e t o use t h e these  stating  the property t o  the  of  the  (2)  in  finally  s p e c i f i e d t i m e and no f u r t h e r  failing cleared  a c t i o n was  required.  Land T i t l e A c t The R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s ,  C h a p t e r 219,  1979  commonly r e f e r r e d  to  as t h e Land T i t l e A c t , p r o v i d e s t h e c o r e l e g i s l a t i o n g o v e r n i n g t h e s u b d i v i s i o n o f l a n d i n B r i t i s h Columbia ( I n c e ,  1977,  48).  The A c t  s p e c i f i c a l l y l e g i s l a t e s a s p e c t s c o n c e r n i n g t h e p r o c e d u r e w h i c h must be adhered t o b y an a p p r o v i n g o f f i c e r . S e c t i o n 77 (2) (a) o f t h e Land T i t l e A c t s t a t e s ; (2) The a p p r o v i n g o f f i c e r s h a l l b e , i n t h e c a s e o f l a n d s situated i n (a) a r u r a l a r e a ; (i) t h e Deputy M i n i s t e r o f T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and Highways; o r ( i i ) a p e r s o n a p p o i n t e d b y t h e L i e u t e n a n t Governor i n C o u n c i l i n r e s p e c t o f a l l or p a r t o f the land situated i n a r u r a l area;  17 F o r most p a r t s o f r u r a l B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , t h e Deputy M i n i s t e r of  Transportation  and  Highways  has  delegated  the  subdivision  approving authority t o a regional approving o f f i c e r . /Area  ' G ' the  approving o f f i c e r  is  located with  For E l e c t o r a l  the  Ministry  of  T r a n s p o r t a t i o n and Highways r e g i o n a l o f f i c e i n Kamloops. With approving  regard  to  officer,  maintaining is  empowered t o  s u b d i v i s i o n f o r a number o f the plan  authority is  to  refuse to  "against  the  Section  86  (1)  character refuse  reasons. approve a  public  approving o f f i c e s t a f f , g e n e r a l i t y makes i t  the  to  of  an  approve a  Under S e c t i o n 85 subdivision i f  interest."  area, plan  (3)  of  h e has  he f e e l s  According to  the  the  regional  t h i s r e a s o n i s v e r y r a r e l y u s e d because i t s  very d i f f i c u l t (c)  lists  t o defend i n c o u r t .  seven more  specific  reasons  for  r e f u s i n g t o approve a s u b d i v i s i o n on l a n d s o u t s i d e m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . (i) t h e a n t i c i p a t e d developement o f t h e s u b d i v i s i o n would i n j u r i o u s l y a f f e c t the e s t a b l i s h e d amenities o f a d j o i n i n g or reasonably adjacent p r o p e r t i e s ; (ii) t h e p l a n does not comply w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s Act relating t o a c c e s s and t h e sufficiency of highway a l l o w a n c e s shown i n t h e p l a n , and w i t h a l l r e g u l a t i o n s o f t h e L i e u t e n a n t Governor i n C o u n c i l r e l a t i n g t o s u b d i v i s i o n p l a n s ; (iii) t h e highways shown i n t h e p l a n a r e n o t c l e a r e d , d r a i n e d , c o n s t r u c t e d and s u r f a c e d t o h i s s a t i s f a c t i o n , o r u n l e s s , i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s he c o n s i d e r s p r o p e r , s e c u r i t y i n an amount and i n a form a c c e p t a b l e t o h i m i s p r o v i d e d ; (iv)  t h e l a n d has inadequate d r a i n a g e  installations;  (v) t h e l a n d i s s u b j e c t , o r c o u l d r e a s o n a b l y be expected t o be s u b j e c t , t o f l o o d i n g , e r o s i o n , l a n d s l i p o r a v a l a n c h e ; (vi) a f t e r due c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a l l a v a i l a b l e e n v i r o n m e n t a l impact and p l a n n i n g s t u d i e s , t h e a n t i c i p a t e d development o f the s u b d i v i s i o n would adversely affect the natural environment t o an u n a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l ; o r (vii) the c o s t t o the Province o f p r o v i d i n g p u b l i c u t i l i t i e s o r o t h e r works o r s e r v i c e s would be e x c e s s i v e . The r e a s o n s f o r r e f u s i n g t o approve a s u b d i v i s i o n l e a n h e a v i l y toward  s o l v i n g problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e e n g i n e e r i n g a s p e c t s o f  18 subdivision.  A  resident  concerned about  s u b d i v i s i o n w i l l have on t h e article if  character  on w h i c h t o base a c o m p l a i n t .  the  proposed  subdivision  the  of  effect  an a r e a ,  a proposed  has o n l y one  Subsection (i)  would  injuriously  states affect  that the  e s t a b l i s h e d amenities or adjacent p r o p e r t i e s the s u b d i v i s i o n could be r e f u s e d . In  a discussion with regional the  affection,  a d j a c e n t p r o p e r t y owners would have t o p r o v i d e d e t a i l e d outlining  would s u f f e r .  the  was  given  that  to  prove  in  Kamloops,  information  impression  approving o f f i c e personnel  p h y s i c a l damage w h i c h  F o r example, i f  injurious  their  residents f e l t t h a t the s u b d i v i s i o n  would undermine t h e l a t e r a l s u p p o r t o f t h e i r p r o p e r t y , have  to  support  this  property  allegation  with a  t h e y would  g e o t e c h n i c a l s t u d y which  would be b o t h d i f f i c u l t and c o s t l y t o o b t a i n . The s u b d i v i s i o n a p p l i c a t i o n r e f e r r a l p r o c e s s employed by t h e approving  officer  offers  little  maintain the character o f t h e i r s u b d i v i s i o n a p p l i c a t i o n s are Regional  District,  Environment,  hope  area.  referred  Keremeos  for  residents  wanting  Within E l e c t o r a l to;  Irrigation  to  Area ' G ' ,  the M i n i s t r y o f H e a l t h , District,  Ministry  of  M i n i s t r y o f F o r e s t s and M i n i s t r y o f L a n d s , Parks and  Housing. E a c h agency reviews t h e p r o p o s e d s u b d i v i s i o n w i t h r e s p e c t  to  t h e i r own l e g i s l a t i o n .  T h e i r recommendations a r e t h e n forwarded t o  the approving o f f i c e r .  He must t h e n r e v i e w t h e recommendations and  make a d e c i s i o n b a s e d upon t h e i s bound.  F o r example,  if  statutory  the M i n i s t r y  requirements b y w h i c h he o f Environment  indicates  t h a t a p r o p o s e d s u b d i v i s i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f l o o d i n g , S e c t i o n 86 (v)  of  refused.  the  Land T i t l e  If,  however,  Act  states  that  the  the Regional D i s t r i c t  s u b d i v i s i o n be r e f u s e d f o r t h e r e a s o n t h a t i t  (1)  s u b d i v i s i o n may be recommends t h a t  the  does n o t comply w i t h  a proposed settlement p l a n , the s u b d i v i s i o n . "official"  employed  refuse  are  used  only  a  as  a  legislated  subdivision.  technically  reason  refusing  regulations  /As  oriented  for  a  a  can  result,  because t h e y  be  most  can be  up  court.  If  an a p p r o v i n g o f f i c e r  can be a p p e a l e d t o Titles Act. the  can be  refuse  recommendations held in  it  Therefore,  to  19 approving o f f i c e r w i l l not  The r e a s o n b e i n g t h a t the s e t t l e m e n t p l a n must be  before  subdivision.  the  approves a s u b d i v i s i o n , t h e  decision  t h e Supreme C o u r t under S e c t i o n 89 o f t h e Land  However, p a s t l e g a l d e c i s i o n s i n d i c a t e t h a t as l o n g as  approving  discrimination  officer  has  acted  in  good f a i t h  and has  not  used  i n h i s d e c i s i o n , the court w i l l uphold h i s d e c i s i o n  (Gray v s . C i t y o f Vancouver,  1977).  Local Services Act The R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s , as t h e  Local Services Act,  Chapter  247,  regulates  except l a n d s w i t h i n m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , District  s u b d i v i s i o n bylaw,  A r e a Number 24 As already Regional  (The G u l f  the  those  and t h o s e  more commonly known  subdivision of regulated  controlled  all  land  by a Regional under  Planning  Islands).  n o t e d i n t h e s e c t i o n under t h e  District  regulations  1979,  s u b d i v i s i o n bylaw  takes  found i n t h e L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t .  "Municipal A c t , "  precedence Thus, the  found i n t h i s A c t o n l y a p p l y where R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t  over  a  the  regulations  r e g u l a t i o n s do  not. The L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t t h r e e h e a d i n g s ; Parcels.  These  provide  the  basic  G e n e r a l , Highway  criteria  for  and  subdivision  approval. Under t h e  "General" heading,  s u b d i v i s i o n may be r e f u s e d i f  it  s e c t i o n 4.04  legislates  that  a  i s subject to erosion, landslides,  f l o o d i n g o r h a s inadequate d r a i n a g e .  However,  S e c t i o n 4.05  allows  20 a  developer  to  circumvent the  above r e g u l a t i o n s  if  he  agrees  to  r e g i s t e r a r e s t r i c t i v e covenant i n f a v o u r o f t h e crown l i m i t i n g  the  use o f t h e s u b j e c t p r o p e r t y . In  Sections  5.01  to  5.11  under  the  heading  of  "Highways",  p r o p o s e d s u b d i v i s i o n s a r e r e g u l a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o highway w i d t h s (s.  5.02),  lanes  turnarounds  (s.  Sections which  (s.  5.07),  5.07) 6.01  provides  and i n t e r s e c t i o n s  to  for  intersecting  6.11  fall  specific  highways  (s.  under  5.08  the  regulations  to  (s.  5.05),  5.10).  heading  of  "Parcels"  concerning the  minimum  p a r c e l s i z e s a l l o w a b l e i n an u n o r g a n i z e d a r e a .  T h e r e a r e numerous  v a r i a b l e s which a f f e c t  S e c t i o n 6.01  the allowable  lot size.  states  t h a t where water and sewer s e r v e a p a r c e l and where b o t h b u i l d i n g and z o n i n g r e g u l a t i o n s a r e i n f o r c e t h e minimum l o t square  feet  regulations, is  not  in  areas  where  there  are  no  s h a l l be 5,000  zoning  or  t h e itunimum s h a l l be 6,000 square f e e t .  applicable  to  Electoral  /Area  'G'  building  This section  because t h e r e  are  no  p a r c e l s connected t o a sewer system. S e c t i o n 6.02 by  a  r e g u l a t e s p r o p o s e d s u b d i v i s i o n s which a r e  coiiitiunity  water  Okanagan-Sirnilkameen  system.  Regional  s u b d i v i s i o n bylaw  No.  300  District takes  o v e r t h i s s e c t i o n and r e q u i r e s a 9,000 square f o o t l o t The  section  of  the  Local  Services  Act  served  most  of  precedence size.  applicable  to  E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' , i s S e c t i o n 6.03 w h i c h r e q u i r e s an 18,000 square f o o t minimum l o t s i z e f o r p a r c e l s not s e r v i c e d b y a cormmjnity water or  sewer  system.  governed b y t h i s Sections parcels  which  community  The m a j o r i t y  lands w i t h i n  this  area  are  regulation.  6.04 are  sewer  of  and 6.05 less  system.  than  regulate 5  acres  Appendix B  the and of  disposing of are the  not Act  waste  on  served by  a  establishes  a  21 procedure  for  disposal f i e l d .  conducting  a  percolation  test  for  Longer r a t e s o f p e r c o l a t i o n and v a r y i n g  degrees o f s l o p e o f t h e l a n d c o u l d r e q u i r e t h a t t h e o f the for  p a r c e l be i n c r e a s e d t o  the  effluent.  required standard, Medical  Health  a  If  test  ensure adequate results  S e c t i o n 6.06  Officer  with  size  drainage  do n o t  meet  the  of the A c t provides the  authority  to  the  deny  subdivision approval. In  conclusion,  statement  that  preserved However,  the  without this  the  character zoning,  analysis  subdivision legislation zoning,  there  legislation  Regional  are  imposed  of  of  District  the  is  area  planners  can not  substantially  existing  land  true.  use  shows t h a t d e s p i t e t h e  many by  controls  the  and  lack  resulting  Federal  and  be  of  from  Provincial  governments. The use i s  l e g i s l a t i o n having  the  most e f f e c t  over  t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission A c t .  land  This Act  r e q u i r e s t h a t landowners w i t h i n t h e A . L . R not h i n d e r  the  agricultural  can  be  argued  portion of  capability of t h e i r property.  that the  the  land  reserve  only  While i t  covers  a  t o t a l land w i t h i n the province,  small  it  must  a l s o be remembered t h a t t h e s e a r e t h e l a n d s e x p e r i e n c i n g the greatest  development p r e s s u r e .  Therefore,  t h e Land  Commission A c t must be c o n s i d e r e d as a major c o n t r o l o f l a n d use i n t h e p r o v i n c e . The s u b d i v i s i o n o f is  governed by  establishes  the  three  land w i t h i n E l e c t o r a l Area 'G*  instruments.  process of  The Land T i t l e  subdivision control  Act  within  22  the  province.  District  The L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t and t h e  of  establish  Okanagan-S i m i lkameen  the  criteria  for  Regional  subdivision  the  approval  bylaw of  a  subdivision. 2.1.2  Without z o n i n g , o f f i c i a l s e t t l e m e n t p l a n s c a n n o t be implemented. Before settlement  analyzing plan  this  i s and t h e  statement,  some i n s i g h t  legislative  powers i t  into  has,  what  a  s h o u l d be  discussed. A  settlement  Municipal  plan  Affairs  is  and  defined  Housing,  P r e p a r a t i o n Of O f f i c i a l S e t t l e m e n t  in  the  1979,  "Technical  Ministry  Guide  For  of The  Plans" a s ;  " a document embodying a statement o f t h e i n t e n d e d f u t u r e development o f a p a r t i c u l a r a r e a . I t s h o u l d be a f l e x i b l e t o o l , r e s p o n s i v e t o change, w h i c h w i l l s e r v e as a g u i d e t o d a y - t o - d a y d e c i s i o n making on t h e p a r t o f R e g i o n a l B o a r d s , p r i v a t e c i t i z e n s and p u b l i c a g e n c i e s such as S c h o o l B o a r d s . " (p. 9) The p r o v i n c i a l governments d e s i r e t o m a i n t a i n t h e p l a n as a g u i d e i s l e g i s l a t e d i n S e c t i o n 810 Act.  This subsection states  preparation  and  adoption  that  of  it  land  (1)  settlement  o f the Municipal  s h a l l be t h e b a s i s f o r use  regulating  bylaws  the and  amendments t o them. With plan,  regard  to  S e c t i o n 809  s p e c i f i c powers  (8)  would seem t o  contained rule  in  a  settlement  that without  l a n d use bylaws implementing i t s p o l i c i e s , t h e o f f i c i a l p l a n cannot d i r e c t l y a f f e c t  t h e r i g h t s o f landowners  specific settlement  (Ince,  1977,  45). In  contrast  to  Council with direct zoned a r e a .  settlement  plans,  a z o n i n g bylaw empowers  c o n t r o l over property  Section  716  (l)(a)  to  (d)  rights  over  of  Municipal  l e g i s l a t e s t h a t C o u n c i l may b y z o n i n g bylaw: (a) d i v i d e a l l o r p a r t o f t h e a r e a o f i n t o zones and d e f i n e each zone e i t h e r d e s c r i p t i o n , o r any c o m b i n a t i o n o f them;  the  land i n  a a  Act  the m u n i c i p a l i t y b y map, p l a n o r  23 (b) regulate the use o f land, b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s , i n c l u d i n g the surface of water, w i t h i n the zones, and the regulations may be d i f f e r e n t f o r d i f f e r e n t zones and f o r d i f f e r e n t uses w i t h i n the zone, and f o r the purposes of t h i s paragraph the power t o regulate includes the power t o p r o h i b i t p a r t i c u l a r uses i n s p e c i f i e d zones; (c) regulate s i z e , shape and s i t i n g o f b u i l d i n g s and structures w i t h i n the zones, and the regulations may be d i f f e r e n t f o r d i f f e r e n t zones and w i t h respect t o d i f f e r e n t uses w i t h i n a zone; and (d) without l i m i t i n g the g e n e r a l i t y of paragraph (b), r e q u i r e the owners or occupiers o f any b u i l d i n g i n a zone t o provide o f f s t r e e t parking and loading space f o r the b u i l d i n g , and may c l a s s i f y b u i l d i n g s and d i f f e r e n t i a t e and discrijidnate between classes w i t h respect t o the amount of space t o be provided, and may exempt any c l a s s of b u i l d i n g or a b u i l d i n g e x i s t i n g a t the time o f adoption of the bylaw from any requirement o f t h i s paragraph. The settlement p l a n i t s e l f i s l e g a l l y empowered t o contain a great deal of information pertojjiing t o the p h y s i c a l development of an area.  S e c t i o n 810  (2) (a) t o  (1) o f the Municipal  Act  authorizes the documentation of; (a) the l o c a t i o n , amount and type of major commercial, i n d u s t r i a l i n s t i t u t i o n a l , r e c r e a t i o n a l and p u b l i c u t i l i t y uses; (b) the l o c a t i o n , amount, type and density of r e s i d e n t i a l development required t o meet the a n t i c i p a t e d housing needs over a p e r i o d o f a t l e a s t 5 years i n the area covered by the plan; (c) the p r o t e c t i o n o f conditions;  land  areas  subject  t o hazardous  (d) the preservation, p r o t e c t i o n and enhancement of land and water areas o f s p e c i a l importance f o r scenic or r e c r e a t i o n a l value or n a t u r a l , h i s t o r i c a l or s c i e n t i f i c i n t e r e s t ; (e) the p r e s e r v a t i o n and continuing use of a g r i c u l t u r a l land f o r present and f u t u r e food production; (f) the proposed sequence of urban development and redevelopment, i n c l u d i n g , where a s c e r t a i n a b l e , the proposed timing, l o c a t i o n and phasing of trunk sewer and water services; (g) the need f o r and p r o v i s i o n o f p u b l i c f a c i l i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g schools, parks and s o l i d waste d i s p o s a l s i t e s ; (h) the l o c a t i o n i n schematic form o f a major road system f o r the p l a n area;  24 (i) t h e l o c a t i o n , amount and t y p e o f development t o be permitted w i t h i n 1 km o f a c o n t r o l l e d a c c e s s highway d e s i g n a t e d under P a r t 6 o f t h e Highway A c t ; (j) the distribution of major land use concentrations o f a c t i v i t y i n r e l a t i o n t o the existing or potential public transit services;  areas and provision of  (k) a program i d e n t i f y i n g t h e a c t i o n s r e q u i r e d b y the r e g i o n a l b o a r d t o implement t h e o f f i c i a l s e t t l e m e n t p l a n ; and (1)  o t h e r matters t h a t may b e r e q u i r e d b y t h e  minister.  A s e t t l e m e n t p l a n can o n l y be deemed an " o f f i c i a l " p l a n once i t  has been adopted as a bylaw.  a  of  majority  the  directors  accordance w i t h S e c t i o n 809 The p r o v i n c i a l parties  be  given  government  the  prepared  municipalities  of  representatives,  has  an o p p o r t u n i t y  S e c t i o n 810  be  An a f f i r m a t i v e at  a  meeting  (4)  in  regional  to  ensured t h a t examine  all  vote of  held  ( 3) o f t h e M u n i c i p a l A c t , i s  proposed p l a n . plan  present  settlement  in  required.  interested  and comment  on  the  and 811 o f t h e A c t r e q u i r e s t h a t consultation  districts,  with  elected  the  member  electoral  areas  t h e M i n i s t e r and t h e p u b l i c .  The Land T i t l e A c t and t h e B . C . A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission A c t a r e o t h e r s o u r c e s o f l e g i s l a t i o n which w i l l now be c o n s i d e r e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e p l a n n e r s second statement. whether  they can be used t o  This w i l l  implement a s e t t l e m e n t  determine  p l a n i n areas  without zoning. W i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e s u b d i v i s i o n o f l a n d s , t h e Land T i t l e A c t states prior  a  number  of  matters  an  approving o f f i c e r  t o making a d e c i s i o n on an a p p l i c a t i o n .  t h e Land T i t l e  Act s p e c i f i c a l l y rules that a l l  conform t o an o f f i c i a l s e t t l e m e n t p l a n i f An example o f t h e use o f t h i s Regional  District  of  must  consider  S e c t i o n 87  (c)  of  s u b d i v i s i o n s must  one e x i s t s .  legislation exists within  Okanagan-SimiLkameen  when  the  the  approving  25 officer plan  refused to  designated  approve a  the  land  s u b d i v i s i o n because t h e  for  park  purposes  settlement  (R.D.O.S.  File  D-82-24). While as  far  a new s u b d i v i s i o n must conform t o t h e s e t t l e m e n t  as  lot  size  is  concerned,  the  Land T i t l e  Act  plan,  does  not  p l a n had been adopted b u t  the  empower t h e c o n t r o l o f l a n d u s e . In  c a s e s where a  existing  zoning  settlement  bylaw  had  intentions  the  zoning  Settlement  P l a n Bylaw.  not  bylaw  been  would  Thus,  if  amended take  the  Z o n i n g Bylaw,  the  reflect  precedence  application  s u b d i v i s i o n which was i n c o n f o r m i t y w i t h t h e not  to  was  its  over  made  Settlement  the  for  a  Plan but  s u b d i v i s i o n would have t o be h e l d  in  abeyance. The A g r i c u l t u r a l agricultural settlement Land T i t l e s  Land Commission A c t ,  capability,  plan.  does  T h i s comes i n  Act,  for  the For  Commission A c t s t a t e s  that  use".  example,  Section  the  plan i s  enforcement  (1)  of  the  of  a the  subordinate to  the  or  (a)  of  regional  l a n d t o be used f o r 31  with  found i n  S e c t i o n 16  "a m u n i c i p a l i t y  agricultural  Further,  in  a form u n l i k e t h a t  settlement  Land Commission A c t .  may n o t p e r m i t  assist  g o v e r n i n g areas  Act  t h e Land district  o t h e r than rules  farm  that  no  l e g i s l a t i o n be c o n t r a r y t o t h e Land Cortimission A c t may be a d o p t e d . The end r e s u l t i s t h a t t h e M i n i s t r y o f M u n i c i p a l A f f a i r s all  Settlement  Plans  to  be  approved b y  the  Agricultural  Commission p r i o r t o f i n a l a d o p t i o n o f t h e S e t t l e m e n t It  requires  must be remembered t h a t t h e Land Commission  Land  P l a n Bylaw. A c t does  not  govern l a n d s which a r e u n s u i t a b l e f o r a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n nor does i t  govern l a n d s which comply w i t h S e c t i o n 19,  exempting l a n d s  26 from  the  reserve.  It  exempts  lands which  meet  the  following  requirements. (1) R e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e u s e o f a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d do not a p p l y to land that, on December 21, 1972, was, b y separate c e r t i f i c a t e o f t i t l e i s s u e d under t h e Land R e g i s t r y A c t , l e s s than 2 acres i n area. (2) The r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e use o f a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d do not apply to land lawfully used f o r o t h e r t h a n farm u s e , e s t a b l i s h e d and c a r r i e d on c o n t i n u o u s l y f o r a t l e a s t 6 months i m m e d i a t e l y p r i o r t o December 21, 1972, u n l e s s and u n t i l (a) t h e use i s changed, o t h e r t h a n t o farm u s e , w i t h o u t t h e p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e cxDmmission; (b) an enactment made a f t e r December 21, the use, or (c) p e r m i s s i o n f o r t h e withdrawn o r e x p i r e s . As a r e s u l t o f the  1972,  use g r a n t e d under  l e g a l exemptions and t h e  prohibits  enactment  is  v a s t amount o f  l a n d t h a t does not f a l l w i t h i n t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land R e s e r v e , Land Commission A c t p r o v i d e s e x t e n s i v e power b u t o n l y o v e r  the  limited  areas. In  conclusion,  the o f f i c i a l  s e t t l e m e n t p l a n bylaw b y  does n o t have t h e l e g i s l a t i v e power t o ensure i t s  implementation.  It  h a s been shown t h a t f o r a s e t t l e m e n t p l a n t o be most  it  s h o u l d be implemented i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h a z o n i n g bylaw.  a  bylaw h a s  the  legislative  authority  to  require  itself  effective Such  landowners  to  comply w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s f o r t h e z o n i n g d i s t r i c t s i n which t h e y are l o c a t e d . The Land T i t l e A c t and t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission A c t both o f f e r Plan.  l i m i t e d amounts o f enforcement power o f t h e  The  Land  Title  Act,  dealing  specifically  Settlement with  the  s u b d i v i s i o n o f l a n d , r e q u i r e s t h a t a l l new s u b d i v i s i o n s adhere t o an o f f i c i a l  settlement p l a n i f  subdivision lot  one e x i s t s .  However,  controlling  s i z e i s o n l y one a s p e c t o f t h e o v e r a l l concept o f  27  a  settlement  plan.  /Another major  aspect i s  the c o n t r o l o f  u s e , o v e r which t h e Land T i t l e A c t h a s no l e g i s l a t i v e  power.  The A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission A c t does o f f e r  legislation  a u t h o r i t y o v e r l a n d use t o implement a s e t t l e m e n t p l a n . t h i s authority  land  However,  a p p l i e s o n l y t o lands w i t h i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l  r e s e r v e and t h o s e n o t exempted b y t h e A c t .  Thus, t h i s  land  authority  i s extensive but l i m i t e d i n scope.  2.1.3  I t i s more e x p e n s i v e developments.  Planners  and government o f f i c i a l s a l i k e  concerned o v e r sprawl  the  (Council  analyzing  the  necessary t o  t o s e r v i c e s p r a w l development t h a n c l u s t e r e d  on  economic,  a r e becoming more  s o c i a l and e n v i r o n m e n t a l  Environmental  Quality,  s p e c i f i c costs a t t r i b u t a b l e determine what urban s p r a w l  costs  1975,266).  Before  t o urban s p r a w l i s and t h e  of  it  is  reasons  for  scattering of  new  it. Ottensmann d e f i n e s development vacant  on  land"  isolated  (1977,389).  urban s p r a w l tracts, Harvey  as  "the  separated  from o t h e r  and C l a r k ,  on t h e  d e f i n e urban sprawl as " a heterogeneous p a t t e r n , density greatly the c i t y "  axially  vary  is  slightly,  Harvey and C l a r k  development.  development Secondly,  hand,  w i t h an o v e r a l l  (1965,2).  urban s p r a w l . urban  other  by  l e s s t h a n t h a t found i n mature compact segments o f  As d e f i n i t i o n s  of  areas  First,  d e s c r i b e d as  so do t h e p o s s i b l e forms  (1965,3) d i s t i n g u i s h t h r e e low  being  density a  continuous  gluttonous  use  of  of  forms urban land.  r i b b o n development i s composed o f segments w h i c h extend  and l e a v e t h e i n t e r s t i c e  undeveloped.  Finally,  leap-frog  development i s t h e s e t t l e m e n t o f compact p a t c h e s o f urban u s e s .  28 The causes o f  sprawl v a r y a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p h y s i c a l ,  and economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f any p a r t i c u l a r r e g i o n . Clark (1)  social  Harvey and  (1965) advance a number o f c a u s e s o f sprawl i n c l u d i n g ; The independence o f d e c i s i o n among m o n o p o l i s t i c c o m p e t i t o r s :  t h e r a p i d e x p a n s i o n o f t h e economic b a s e o f a h o u s i n g a r e a prompts many d e v e l o p e r s  to  respond t o  the  demand f o r  housing.  This  independent response produces a v a r i e t y o f d i s c o n t i n u o u s u n r e l a t e d developments. (2)  Speculation:  Speculation  produces  both  the  s u b d i v i s i o n o f some l a n d s and t h e w i t h - h o l d i n g o f o t h e r is  the  lack of  co-ordination of  the  decision to  produces sprawl and not t h e s p e c u l a t i o n (3)  Physical terrain:  premature land.  speculate  It  which  itself.  The p a t t e r n o f development t e n d s t o  utilize  l a n d which i s most r e a d i l y and e c o n o m i c a l l y a v a i l a b l e . (4)  Public regulations:  Government  l e g i s l a t i o n contributes  to  s p r a w l by i m b a l a n c i n g t h e a t t r a c t i v e n e s s o f competing a r e a s .  For  example,  the  differences  i n l a n d use c o n t r o l s i n s i d e and o u t s i d e  c o r p o r a t e l i m i t s o f a m u n i c i p a l i t y make t h e l e s s e r c o n t r o l l e d a r e a more a t t r a c t i v e (5)  (Harvey and C l a r k ,  T r a n s p o r t a t i o n networks:  routes w i l l a f f e c t (6)  Public  Policy:  taxed  The l o c a t i o n o f highways o r  transit  t h e spread o f urban s p r a w l . Property  because as scon as farmland immediately  1965,4).  at  the  is  taxes  accentuate  urban  sprawl  s c h e d u l e d f o r development,  higher  values  normally  it  is  attributed  to  urban areas.  Empirical  data  h a s been l i m i t e d . on t h i s  subject  concerning the  actual  costs of  urban  sprawl  One o f t h e most comprehensive s t u d i e s conducted i s the  1974,  R e a l E s t a t e Research a n a l y s i s ,  "The  29  Costs  of  Urban  Sprawl".  The  community development p a t t e r n s : planned,  and a  lots  from  the  land as i n factor  two.  (R.E.R., a high  The  of  developments  were  l a n d u s e , economic c o s t s ,  l a n d use a n a l y s i s  i n a low d e n s i t y  included  types  and p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s . show t h a t  quarter  acre  sprawl oommunity may consume o v e r h a l f  acre per dwelling u n i t is  the  following variables:  environmental e f f e c t s , Results  compared t h r e e  low d e n s i t y s p r a w l , h i g h d e n s i t y  combination o f  analyzed by the  study  if  land f o r  1974,2).  infrastructure  This  an  such as r o a d s ,  i s more t h a n t w i c e as much  d e n s i t y p l a n n e d community.  Another  i s t h a t h i g h d e n s i t y a r e a s use o n l y h a l f  noteable  as much l a n d f o r  t r a n s p o r t a t i o n as low d e n s i t y a r e a s f o r t h e same number o f p e o p l e . There affected  is  by  evidence  that  development  economic  patterns.  costs  The  are  study  substantially indicates  that  o v e r a l l c o s t s t o p u b l i c and p r i v a t e i n v e s t o r s were 44 p e r c e n t in  high  density  developments  developments  (R.E.R.,  1974,3).  c o s t s o f c o n s t r u c t i n g r o a d s and An pollution  analysis is  of  the  strongly  as  compared  results  generates  indicate  a f f e c t e d by t h e  approximately  density  sprawl  (R.E.R.,  1974,8).  a  high  45 p e r c e n t  community  density  utilities.  environmental  that  low  The l a r g e s t s a v i n g s came from t h e  major sources o f p o l l u t i o n s t u d i e d w e r e : The  to  housing  costs  showed  that  air  development p a t t e r n .  Two  automobiles and h e a t i n g .  density  planned  community  l e s s a i r p o l l u t i o n t h a n a low the  same  number  of  people  The c l u s t e r i n g o f houses a l o n e c a n reduce  p o l l u t i o n from a u t o m o b i l e s b y 20 t o 30 p e r c e n t . While p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s  less  are very d i f f i c u l t  (R.E.R.,  air  1974,8).  to quantify,  it  is  p o s s i b l e t o measure such a s p e c t s a s commuting time and maintenance  30  time  required  when  living  center, Also,  for  in  the  differing  a high  density  residence types. development  commuting t i m e i s s h o r t e r t h a n i f maintenance  of  an  apartment  economic c o s t s ,  close to  requires  "higher  the  city  l i v i n g i n the suburbs.  maintenance o f a h o u s e , which i s no s u r p r i s e The study c o n c l u d e s t h a t  As e x p e c t e d ,  less  time  than  either.  densities result  in  lower  e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o s t s and some p e r s o n a l c o s t s f o r  g i v e n number o f d w e l l i n g u n i t s "  (R.E.R.,  1974,6).  a  The s t u d y shows  t h a t t h e s e c o s t s c a n be reduced b y b e t t e r p l a n n i n g and i n c r e a s e d density.  However,  that  study h a s  this  the  C o u n c i l on E n v i r o n m e n t a l Q u a l i t y ,  failed  to  take  into  account t h e  notes  costs  and  b e n e f i t s o f p e r s o n a l p r e f e r e n c e s and t h o s e r e l a t e d t o t h e revenues g e n e r a t e d by d i f f e r e n t Without  development t y p e s  analyzing  specific  economic,  p e r s o n a l d a t a from E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' , i t t h e p l a n n e r s statement  is  true;  (1975,272).  it  environmental  or  can s a f e l y be s a i d t h a t  i s more e x p e n s i v e t o  service  s p r a w l development t h a n c l u s t e r e d developments. From t h i s a n a l y s i s comes another q u e s t i o n : What a r e t h e  costs  o f e i t h e r n o t s e r v i c i n g sprawl development o r s i m p l y p r o v i d i n g low level servicing?  T o answer t h i s q u e s t i o n would i n v o l v e r e s e a r c h  on u s i n g a lower s t a n d a r d o f s e r v i c i n g t h a n i n t h e above a n a l y s i s . Further  investigation w i l l  be  left  to  future  rural  development  planners.  2.1.4  W i t h o u t z o n i n g , development can t a k e p l a c e on h a z a r d l a n d s .  It means. include:  i s e s s e n t i a l t o e x p l a i n j u s t what t h e term "hazard l a n d s " For the purpose o f t h i s  statement,  the  definition  shall  31  - l a n d which i s subject t o e r o s i o n ; - l a n d w h i c h may s l i p when d e v e l o p e d , used o r o c c u p i e d ; - l a n d , which when d e v e l o p e d , u s e d o r o c c u p i e d may cause adjacent p a r c e l s t o s l i p ; - l a n d w h i c h may be inundated b y a l a n d s l i p i f l a n d above another p a r c e l s l i p s ; - l a n d which i s subject t o f l o o d i n g ; - l a n d which h a s inadequate d r a i n a g e .  Before  analyzing  the  extent  to  which  existing  provincial  r e g u l a t i o n s c o n t r o l development on h a z a r d l a n d s i t i s i m p o r t a n t  to  know what l o c a l c o n t r o l s such a s z o n i n g and b u i l d i n g bylaws c o u l d p l a y i f they were i n e f f e c t . The degree t o w h i c h z o n i n g c a n e f f e c t land Act.  i s governed b y S e c t i o n 716 ( l ) ( b )  development on h a z a r d  and (c) o f t h e M u n i c i p a l  T h i s s e c t i o n s t a t e s t h a t a c o u n c i l may b y a z o n i n g bylaw (b) r e g u l a t e t h e use o f l a n d , b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s , i n c l u d i n g t h e s u r f a c e o f w a t e r , w i t h i n t h e z o n e s , and t h e r e g u l a t i o n s may b e d i f f e r e n t f o r d i f f e r e n t zones and f o r d i f f e r e n t u s e s w i t h i n a z o n e , and f o r t h e purposes o f t h i s p a r a g r a p h t h e power t o r e g u l a t e i n c l u d e s t h e power t o p r o h i b i t p a r t i c u l a r uses i n s p e c i f i e d z o n e s ; (c) r e g u l a t e t h e s i z e , shape and s i t i n g o f b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s w i t h i n t h e z o n e s , and t h e r e g u l a t i o n s may be d i f f e r e n t f o r d i f f e r e n t zones and w i t h r e s p e c t t o d i f f e r e n t uses w i t h i n a z o n e ;  Also,  Section  716  (2)(a)  requires  that  council,  when  making  r e g u l a t i o n s , have due r e g a r d t o (a) t h e p r o m o t i o n o f h e a l t h , of the p u b l i c .  The  above  sections  Regional  safety,  convenience and w e l f a r e  o f the Municipal A c t provide  Councils  or  authority  t o i n c l u d e c o n t r o l s g o v e r n i n g t h e development o f h a z a r d  lands within t h e i r  District  zoning bylaws.  Boards  with  Typically,  the  Municipal  legislative  c o u n c i l s o r boards  i n c l u d e f l o o d p l a i n hazard r e g u l a t i o n which s p e c i f y ;  32  (a) t h e d i s t a n c e a s t r u c t u r e must be from any n a t u r a l boundary o f a l a k e , swamp o r pond and from any n a t u r a l w a t e r c o u r s e , (b) t h e e l e v a t i o n a s t r u c t u r e s f l o o r b o a r d s must be above t h e 200 y e a r f l o o d l e v e l , where e s t a b l i s h e d by the M i n i s t r y o f Environment, o r t h e n a t u r a l boundary o f a l a k e , swamp, pond and w a t e r c o u r s e .  Furthermore, public,  if  council  S e c t i o n 716  deems  (l)(b)  an  area  to  be hazardous  council  could  agricultural  zone  zone.  an  area  subject  to  The s t a t u t o r y  s t r u c t u r e s on  authority  Section  734  delegation  (a)  of  to  (k)  to  it.  empowering the R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t s  of  authority,  the  Municipal  the  area i s  Act.  Regional  From  With regard Section  8  (b)  the  the  control of  Bylaw,  a  geo-technical  development  is  l o c a t e d on u n s t a b l e  building  not t o h i s  of  governing  the  building  s t u d y be completed  the  lands,  inspector  the  results of  the  i n s p e c t o r may r e f u s e  the  If  if  the  he  to  feels  land.  satisfaction,  on h a z a r d  permit.  E l e c t o r a l Area control  development  allows  demand t h a t  study a r e  this  (See Appendix A)  to  of  to  found  District  Okanagan-SimiLkameen h a s adopted B u i l d i n g Bylaw No. 688 building inspection.  an  the p o s s i b i l i t y o f  regulate the construction o f structures w i t h i n t h e i r in  to  F o r example,  landslip  Such a zone would e l i m i n a t e  locating residential  the  o f t h e M u n i c i p a l A c t empowers them  zone t h e p r o p e r t y t o a use w h i c h i s l e a s t h a z a r d o u s . a  to  development  'G  1  on  has no z o n i n g o r b u i l d i n g bylaw, hazard  lands  falls  solely  j u r i s d i c t i o n o f e x i s t i n g p r o v i n c i a l government  the  control of  the  Health A c t ,  devlopment on h a z a r d  S e c t i o n 2:06  of  the  lands.  under  the the  regulations.  T h e r e a r e two p o s s i b l e s i t u a t i o n s which p r e s e n t for  so,  opportunities  With respect  Sewage D i s p o s a l  to  Regulations  33 ( B . C . Reg.  577/75),  tank p e r m i t  prior  requires to  t h a t a developer apply f o r a  construction.  before applying for a permit, the  site  outline  by t h e the  percolation  owner o f  method test  Section  S u b s e c t i o n s (a)  conducting these  determines  demands  whether  tests.  the  In  soil  is  a b s o r b i n g t h e volume o f e f f l u e n t t o be d i s p o s e d o f . of  the  Sewage D i s p o s a l R e g u l a t i o n s ,  absorption f i e l d water t a b l e  is  Section  determining legislative  l e s s than 4  5:02  the  of  natural  that  (b)  short,  a  capable  of  Section  6:16  a  f e e t below the n a t u r a l  the  conventional  ground l e v e l .  i s concerned about a h i g h water  regulations,  ground w a t e r  table.  lists  The  the  one  methods  last  for  source  of  means o f c o n t r o l l i n g development i n t h e H e a l t h A c t  found i n S e c t i o n 6:19 absorption  states  and  s h a l l n o t be l o c a t e d i n an a r e a where t h e ground  Where t h e M e d i c a l H e a l t h O f f i c e r table,  that  a p e r c o l a t i o n t e s t b e completed on  the property.  for  5:01  septic  field  boundary  be of  of the located a  lake  regulations, no or  less  other  which r e q u i r e s t h a t  than or  "100  other  feet  from  body o f  is an  the  non-tidal  water". If,  i n the o p i n i o n o f the Medical Health O f f i c e r ,  sewage d i s p o s a l system may a f f e c t or  s u r f a c e water t o t h e  health,  S e c t i o n 2:16  The  the q u a l i t y  extent that  it  o f any ground water  may be hazardous t o human  allows f o r the r e f u s a l of a  second s i t u a t i o n  a proposed  which presents  permit.  an o p p o r t u n i t y  c o n t r o l o f development on h a z a r d l a n d s i s when a d e v e l o p e r  for  the  applies  for subdivision approval. The Land T i t l e t o the states:  Act contains  subdivisions of  s p e c i f i c regulations  land subject  to flooding.  pertaining  S e c t i o n 82  (1)  34  (1) Where l a n d w i t h i n a p l a n o f s u b d i v i s i o n i s s u b j e c t , o r c o u l d r e a s o n a b l e be expected t o be s u b j e c t , t o f l o o d i n g , no a p p r o v i n g o f f i c e r s h a l l approve t h e s u b d i v i s i o n w i t h o u t t h e p r i o r consent o f t h e Deputy M i n i s t e r o f Environment who may r e q u i r e , as a c o n d i t i o n o f h i s c o n s e n t , t h a t t h e s u b d i v i d e r e n t e r i n t o such covenants r e g i s t e r a b l e under S e c t i o n 215 as t h e deputy m i n i s t e r c o n s i d e r s a d v i s a b l e .  The  Ministry  Appendix B)  of  They  Environment  covenants  are  specific.  (See  regulate;  - t h e d i s t a n c e r e q u i r e d between a home o r a m o b i l e home and t h e n a t u r a l boundary o f t h e w a t e r c o u r s e ; - t h e e l e v a t i o n o f the underside o f the floorsystem; - t h e means o f a c q u i r i n g t h e n e c e s s a r y e l e v a t i o n .  The k e y a s p e c t o f  this  covenant, w h i c h must be s i g n e d b e f o r e  s u b d i v i s i o n i s a p p r o v e d , waives t h e damages  from t h e  province  or  right of  regional  t h e owner  district.  The  to  the  claim  covenant  p r o v i d e s an i m p o r t a n t s o u r c e o f c o n t r o l o f development on h a z a r d lands. Section  86  (l)(c)(v)  Approving O f f i c e r  to  of  refuse  the to  Land T i t l e  approve  Act  empowers  the  a s u b d i v i s i o n on h a z a r d  l a n d s i f he c o n s i d e r s t h a t (v) t h e l a n d i s s u b j e c t , o r c o u l d r e a s o n a b l y be e x p e c t e d t o be s u b j e c t , t o f l o o d i n g , e r o s i o n , l a n d s l i p o r a v a l a n c h e .  The more s p e c i f i c , L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t , regulations  which  can  and  are  being  used  development on h a z a r d l a n d s .  S e c t i o n 4.04  land  erosion,  which  is  subject  to  c o n t a i n s a number in  the  control  o f the A c t , states  landslip,  avalanche  of of  that or  inadequate d r a i n a g e may not be s u b d i v i d e d . S e c t i o n 4.05  of the A c t , authorizes the approving o f f i c e r  approve a s u b d i v i s i o n b u t ,  by covenant,  restrict  or p r o h i b i t  c o n s t r u c t i o n o f b u i l d i n g s on any p a r t o f a p a r c e l which i s  to the  subject  35  to  the  conditions  regulation  cited  overlaps  in  Section  S e c t i o n 82  (1)  4.04  of  and 86  the  Act.  (l)(c)(i)  of  This the  Land  T i t l e A c t , previously noted. In  order  that  comprehensively, provide further potential the  a  the  of  subdivision  approving o f f i c e r  can  be  may r e q u i r e  dealt  with  t h a t an owner  i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h w i l l h e l p determine t h e r i s k  hazards.  S e c t i o n 4.06  approving o f f i c e r  any o f t h e  plan  the  right  of the L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t , t o demand t h a t an owner  of  gives  provide  following:  (a) T o p o g r a p h i c s u r v e y where t h e t e r r a i n i s s t e e p , i r r e g u l a r , o r otherwise difficult t o appraise i n respect of the s u b d i v i s i o n s u i t i n g the c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f the land being subdivided: (b)  Spot e l e v a t i o n s :  (c) A p r o f e s s i o n a l e n g i n e e r ' s r e p o r t  on  ( i ) t h e e f f e c t on s o i l s t a b i l i t y o f d i s t u r b i n g n a t u r a l growth, o r changing t h e m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t o f the s o i l by developing, u s i n g , o r occupying the l a n d : ( i i ) groundwater l e v e l s and c o n d i t i o n s f o r as much o f y e a r as i s c o n s i d e r e d n e c e s s a r y : (iii) t h e depth and e x t e n t frequency o f i t s o c c u r r i n g .  S e c t i o n 6.04  of the A c t ,  of  requires  flooding  and the  the  likely  t h a t where a p a r c e l i n  a  proposed s u b d i v i s i o n i s l e s s t h a n 5 a c r e s , a p e r c o l a t i o n t e s t must be completed f o r  each l o t .  S e c t i o n 6.06  requires  r e s u l t s be forwarded t o t h e M e d i c a l H e a l t h O f f i c e r And  the  Officers  capabilities  recomrnendation,  o f the s o i l ,  based  on t h e  t h a t the  test  for  approval.  waste  disposal  must t h e n be forwarded t o t h e  approving  officer. In  c o n c l u s i o n , the  power  to  control  development  l a n d s w i t h i n an a r e a w i t h no l o c a l r e g u l a t i o n s ,  on  hazard  when the l a n d  is  36  not  being  subdivided,  regulations.  is  Controlling  limited  to  the  development  of  strength hazard  of  health  l a n d s when  a  s u b d i v i s i o n p l a n h a s been proposed i s ertiminantly more s u c c e s s f u l . For  regional  planners  to  state  that  without  development on h a z a r d l a n d s can n o t be c o n t r o l l e d , true.  Considering that  controlled  and  only  is  any new s u b d i v i s i o n w i l l be existing  parcels  zoning, partially adequately  remain  relatively  u n c o n t r o l l e d , t h e p l a n n e r s statement might be somewhat o v e r s t a t e d .  2.1.5  W i t h o u t z o n i n g , r e s i d e n t s h e a l t h and s a f e t y c a n not be p r o t e c t e d .  Rather t h a n r e - a n a l y z i n g r e g u l a t i o n s w h i c h have a l r e a d y discussed, statement  an attempt w i l l be made t o determine no.  5 by  examining  an e x i s t i n g  been  the v a l i d i t y  of  Regional D i s t r i c t  of  Okanagan-Siirdlkameen z o n i n g bylaw t o see w h i c h r e g u l a t i o n s promote t h e h e a l t h and s a f e t y o f r e s i d e n t s .  It  w i l l a l s o be n o t e d whether  t h e s e r e g u l a t i o n s a r e d u p l i c a t e d i n any p r o v i n c i a l A c t s . The  words  Municipal Act S e c t i o n 716  "health" as k e y  (2)(a)  and  "safety"  elements  when  under  (a) t h e p r o m o t i o n o f h e a l t h , welfare o f the p u b l i c ;  "safety"  mean.  identified  preparing  a  in  zoning  the  bylaw.  states:  (2) I n making r e g u l a t i o n s s h a l l have due r e g a r d t o  Unfortunately,  are  this  safety,  s e c t i o n the  council  convenience and  t h e M u n i c i p a l A c t f a i l s t o d e f i n e what " h e a l t h " and Because t h i s  analysis w i l l  r e g u l a t i o n s w h i c h promote b o t h , i t  attempt  to  i s essential that a  identify definition  f o r each, be a r t i c u l a t e d . F o r t h e p u r p o s e o f p l a n n e r s statement n o . 5, t h e p r o m o t i o n o f "health",  i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a z o n i n g bylaw, w i l l be d e f i n e d as t h e  37 irrplementation o f r e g u l a t i o n s w h i c h ; a) p r o t e c t a g a i n s t n o i s e and s m e l l , and b) p r o t e c t a g a i n s t t h e s p r e a d o f d i s e a s e .  The meaning o f " s a f e t y " i s much more d i f f i c u l t that  what  looked  constitutes  on  analysis  as  is  safe  situation  unsafe by  one which w i l l  Nonetheless, "safety",  being  a  for  another.  not  be  t o d e f i n e , because one p e r s o n may be  The  concept  investigated  f o r t h e purpose o f t h i s statement,  in  of  this  risk study.  t h e promotion o f  i n the c o n t e x t o f a z o n i n g bylaw, w i l l be d e f i n e d as t h e  implementation o f r e g u l a t i o n s w h i c h ; a) p r o t e c t a g a i n s t t h e s p r e a d o f  fire,  b) p r o t e c t a g a i n s t t h e l o c a t i o n o f l a n d u s e s which c o u l d be hazardous t o humans, and c ) p r o t e c t a g a i n s t i n j u r y o r a c c i d e n t on highways through improper l o c a t i o n o r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f developments.  An a n a l y s i s w i l l Okanagan-Similkameen, to  identify  "safety" focus  the  now be made o f Electoral  regulations  o f the r e s i d e n t s .  which  'D'  normally  promote  development.  General  Requirements  the  100  "health"  and  the analysis w i l l  found on t h e  fringe  areas  T h i s d i s t r i c t was s e l e c t e d because i t  related regulations  density  of  Z o n i n g Bylaw No.  t h e one w h i c h s h o u l d c o n t a i n t h e g r e a t e s t "safety"  Regional D i s t r i c t  More s p e c i f i c a l l y ,  on a z o n i n g d i s t r i c t  outside municipalities.  /Area  the  related to  There  will  number o f the  a l s o be  s e c t i o n because i t  "health"  is and  pressures of higher an  analysis  pertains  to  of  all  the lands  governed under t h i s Bylaw. The A g r i c u l t u r a l / R e s i d e n t i a l 'D'  Z o n i n g Bylaw No.  covering District.  the  fringe  100  is  areas  (See Appendix C)  a  of  (A/R) D i s t r i c t o f E l e c t o r a l A r e a zoning d i s t r i c t  communities  normally  within  Subsection (2)(a)(i)  the  found  Regional  and ( i i )  along  38  w i t h s u b s e c t i o n (11) limiting  the  are  seen as h e a l t h  species of  operations,  the  related  animal  and t h e  has  recognized  District  regulations.  non-agricultural that  both  By  based  people  and  a n i m a l s r e q u i r e adequate space f o r a h e a l t h y c o - e x i s t a n c e . A t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e t h e r e a r e no p r o v i n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s which limit  the  number  of  animals  similar  to  t h o s e found i n  the  A/R  regulates  the  zoning d i s t r i c t . Subsection distance  structures  property in  the  (6)(d),  under Y a r d s and S e t b a c k s ,  housing  livestock  l i n e and d w e l l i n g u n i t . fringe  areas  s a f e t y problems. Boundary H e a l t h  Unit  there i s l i t t l e proximity  be  away  from  a  Here a g a i n , i n c r e a s e d d e n s i t i e s  increase the  Dr.  shall  likelihood of  L.  Copland,  in  the Greater  both h e a l t h  Medical Health O f f i c e r Vancouver a r e a ,  and  for  stated  the that  l i k e l i h o o d o f any d i s e a s e r e s u l t i n g from t h e c l o s e  o f humans t o  animals.  He  d i d , however,  note t h a t  he  • c o n s i d e r e d b o t h s m e l l and n o i s e o f a n i m a l s as a h e a l t h problem and suggested  that  established becomes  this  for  more  of  was  the  livestock a  problem  reason  that  operations. as  The  densities  setbacks safety  increase  had of  been  humans  because  the  p r o b a b i l i t y o f someone b e i n g s c r a t c h e d , k i c k e d o r b i t t e n i n c r e a s e s proportionately. The p r o v i n c i a l S a n i t a r y R e g u l a t i o n s  (B.C. Regulation  149/59),  adopted p u r s u a n t t o t h e H e a l t h A c t , p r o v i d e s a s i m i l a r  restriction  to  regulation  that  found i n  the  l o c a l bylaw.  S e c t i o n 44 o f t h e  r e s t r i c t s hogs t o a s p e c i f i e d d i s t a n c e from a highway, h o u s e , w e l l o r stream.  It  a l s o allows the M e d i c a l Health O f f i c e r t o i n c r e a s e  t h e i s o l a t i o n d i s t a n c e t o 500 f e e t ,  if  found n e c e s s a r y t o  a n u i s a n c e o r a menace t o t h e p u b l i c h e a l t h .  prevent  Dr. Copland stated  39  that the reason hogs have been regulated i s because hog are  very  smelly  and  operations  are consistently the most complained about  farm operation i n the province. Overall,  zoning  regulations  concerning  the  separation  of  l i v e s t o c k or animals from humans are more comprehensive than are the p r o v i n c i a l regulations.  The primary reason f o r t h i s i s that  the zoning regulations are more r e l a t e d to problems s p e c i f i c to a p a r t i c u l a r area. Subsection  (6) (a) and  (b)  regulate  the  Yards and  Setbacks  required f o r p r i n c i p a l and accessory buildings from the l o t l i n e s and  each  other.  These  regulations  are  uniformity o f structures f o r maintaining  designed property  to  values and  prevent the spread of f i r e from one b u i l d i n g t o another. regulations are  found under the B r i t i s h  which  that  requires  structures  be  promote to  Similar  Columbia Building Code  varying  distances  apart  depending on t h e i r f i r e resistance. Subsection Site  Width  of  (4)  regulates the Minimum S i t e Area and Minimum  properties  within  the  A/R  district.  These  regulations help promote the health of the residents i n the area. Subsection  ( 4 ) (a)  legislates  irdjiumum  parcel  sizes  which  are  designed t o ensure that residents can dispose of t h e i r sewage and obtain water i n a manner which i s not harmful to t h e i r health. the case o f subsection  In  ( 4 ) ( a ) ( i ) , where both water and sewage are  piped on and o f f the property, the minimum l o t s i z e i s established to maintain the reasons.  character  Subsection  of  the  area  rather  than  for health  ( 4 ) ( a ) ( i i ) requires a larger minimum l o t size  when the sewage i s disposed  of on the property  s a t i s f a c t o r y absorption f i e l d .  Subsection  to provide  for a  ( 4 ) ( a ) ( i i i ) requires an  40  even l a r g e r a r e a when water i s o b t a i n e d and sewage i s d i s p o s e d o f on t h e  same s i t e .  land i s  In  required to  order  t o p r e v e n t h e a l t h problems  ensure t h a t  the  sewage does n o t  adequate  contaminate  the d r i n k i n g water. Provincial virtually  regulations  found  d u p l i c a t e t h e rrdnimum l o t  zoning bylaw.  in  the  Local  Services  Act,  s i z e r e s t r i c t i o n s found i n  the  The o n l y d i f f e r e n c e between t h e two i s found i n  the  regulation  concerning areas  s e r v i c e d b y a community water system  and n o t  coirmunity sewage  system.  a  bylaw p e r m i t s  a parcel size of  In  these  areas,  Area  'D'  28,  the  General  Z o n i n g Bylaw No.  S u b s e c t i o n (1)  any  ground  It  section  applicable to  of  Electoral  land within  all  (See Appendix D)  r e s t r i c t s t h e growth o r c o n s t r u c t i o n  o b s t r u c t i o n between level  is  size.  i s d e s i g n e d t o promote t h e s a f e t y o f m o t o r i s t s  a t highway i n t e r s e c t i o n s . of  Requirements  100,  d i s t r i c t s o f the zoning bylaw.  zoning  9,000 square f e e t w h i l e t h e L o c a l  S e r v i c e s A c t r e q u i r e s 7,500 square f o o t minimum l o t Section  the  and up t o  15  the  levels  f e e t back  of  3 and  from t h e  10  feet  above  intersection  the  r i g h t o f way. A  provincial  regulation  contained w i t h i n  the  Highway  Act  p r o v i d e s a s i m i l a r r e s t r i c t i o n t o t h a t found i n t h e z o n i n g bylaw. The o n l y d i f f e r e n c e 20  foot  i s that the p r o v i n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n  s e t b a c k from t h e  i n t e r s e c t i o n o f the r i g h t  requires  o f way.  a  This  i s more s t r i n g e n t than t h e z o n i n g bylaw. Subsection regulations  (3),  of  the  z o n i n g bylaw,  governing parking f o r the  the E l e c t o r a l Area.  establishes  specific  v a r i o u s l a n d uses found  in  The r e g u l a t i o n n o t o n l y l e g i s l a t e s t h e number  o f spaces r e q u i r e d b u t a l s o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n m a t e r i a l .  41  A  provincial  provides  a  regulation  similar  comprehensive. any p a r c e l  found  requirement,  F o r example,  in  but  the  Local  one  which  s e c t i o n 4.15  i n a proposed s u b d i v i s i o n , there  regulation  subdivided. bylaw  is  is  only  Whereas,  enforceable  the  applicable at  developed w i t h o u t  when  is  not  times.  The L o c a l S e r v i c e s  a  property  Therefore,  subdivision there  adequate p a r k i n g on t h e s i t e .  is  for  s h a l l be an a r e a on  is  being  regulation contained w i t h i n the  all  as  only requires that  t h e p a r c e l s u i t a b l e f o r p a r k i n g two v e h i c l e s . Act  Services Act  if  zoning  a property  no r e g u l a t i o n  to  is  ensure  T h i s would l e a v e v e h i c l e s no p l a c e  t o p a r k b u t on t h e roadway, c r e a t i n g a s a f e t y p r o b l e m . S u b s e c t i o n ( 7 ) o f t h e z o n i n g bylaw e s t a b l i s h e s s p e c i f i c floodplain public.  regulations Legislation  designed  to  governing  promote  the  the  elevation  safety above  d i s t a n c e back t h a t s t r u c t u r e s must be from a n a t u r a l or  highwater  regulations.  mark  are  The f i r s t  Disposal Regulations,  covered  establishes  S e c t i o n 6:16  two  similar  the  and  the  watercourse provincial  i s t h e H e a l t h A c t w h i c h , under t h e Sewage  absorption f i e l d to a watertable, of water.  by  of  l i m i t s t o t h e p r o x i m i t y o f an a n a t u r a l w a t e r c o u r s e o r a body  r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e ground w a t e r t a b l e n o t be  l e s s t h a n 4 f e e t below t h e n a t u r a l ground s u r f a c e i n an a r e a where an a b s o r p t i o n f i e l d  is  located.  S e c t i o n 6:19  (e)  regulates  the  d i s t a n c e an a b s o r p t i o n f i e l d must be from t h e n a t u r a l boundary o f a  lake  oriented  or  other  toward  promote t h e  body o f the  safety  water.  promotion  of  While health,  these  regulations  they  also  are  serve  o f t h e p u b l i c b y f o r c i n g b u i l d i n g s away  to from  low l y i n g a r e a s . The  second p r o v i n c i a l  S e c t i o n 82  (1)  regulation  is  the  Land T i t l e  o f the A c t allows the Approving O f f i c e r t o  Act. request  42  the  prior  consent  of  the  Deputy M i n i s t e r  approving a subdivision i f then  the  perogative  subdivider  enter and  similar  those  regulations,  Deputy  a  Minister  covenant  elevations  of  contained  however,  Environment  before  the land i s subject t o f l o o d i n g .  the  into  watercourses to  of  of  to  regulating  structures in  the  only pertain  request  It  that  setbacks  above  zoning  flood  is the  from levels,  bylaw.  These  t o l a n d s b e i n g s u b d i v i d e d and  do n o t a p p l y t o l a n d s b e i n g d e v e l o p e d . In more  conclusion,  specific  animal,  this  a n a l y s i s has shown t h a t z o n i n g p r o v i d e s  and comprehensive  livestock,  building,  enforced by the p r o v i n c e . as  a  result  Electoral control  of  Area,  health  Therefore,  and  they  the  form  of  small  and f l o o d p l a i n r e g u l a t i o n t h a n t h o s e  problems  Provincial  safety  can not  in  The l o c a l c o n t r o l s have been developed  specific whereas  control  be  hazards  which  have  regulations on  expected  a  to  arisen are  province control  in  the  designed wide  to  basis.  area  specific  the  planners  problems. Overall,  one  statement  that  residents  can  the not  would  health be  d e n s i t i e s were g r e a t e r , of greater would be  concern.  to  and  protected the  disagree  safety  of  without  with  Electoral zoning.  threat to health  Area Perhaps  'G' if  and s a f e t y would be  The o n l y r e g u l a t i o n t h e z o n i n g bylaw has t h a t  great benefit  regulation.  have  Otherwise,  to E l e c t o r a l Area  'G'  is  the p r o v i n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s  the  floodplain  seem t o p r o v i d e  adequate h e a l t h and s a f e t y c o n t r o l s .  2.1.6  Unzoned a r e a s become m e l t i n g p o t s f o r u n d e s i r a b l e l a n d uses  In o r d e r t o t e s t t h e v a l i d i t y  o f t h i s statement,  the l a n d use  44 p a t t e r n o f t h e unzoned Keremeos f r i n g e a r e a w i l l be compared t o a zoned f r i n g e a r e a w i t h a s i m i l a r p o p u l a t i o n s i z e .  T h i s w i l l show  the  controlled  extent  to  which  undesirable  land  uses  are  by  zoning. The Keremeos f r i n g e a r e a i s t a k e n as t h e S e t t l e m e n t shown i n Plan".  the  " T e c h n i c a l Supplement  (See F i g u r e 2)  to  the  Keremeos  Plan Area Settlement  The l a n d use p a t t e r n i n t h e Keremeos a r e a  w i l l be compared t o t h e Okanagan F a l l s f r i n g e  area.  While  there  a r e no m u n i c i p a l b o u n d a r i e s t o l e g a l l y d i s t i n g u i s h t h e urban a r e a from t h e  fringe,  it  would  seem a p p r o p r i a t e  to  accept  i n s i d e t h e Okanagan F a l l s Sewage C o l l e c t i o n D i s t r i c t land outside i t  as t h e f r i n g e .  the  as urban and  The o u t e r b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e  a r e a a r e t a k e n as t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e Okanagan F a l l s Plan Area  in  the  Settlement  Plan".  " T e c h n i c a l Supplement (See F i g u r e  to  the  study, the  the  heading o f  the  in  the  form  commercial and t o u r i s t  of  Granted, there are other however,  this  cross-section of planners  study  traffic  important  fall  Under t h i s  this under the  heading  commercial u s e s .  r e a s o n t h e s e u s e s were chosen i s because t h e y nuisance  is  l a n d use c o d i n g system o f  " T e c h n i c a l supplement Maps".  a r e found i n d u s t r i a l ,  Falls  F o r t h e purpose o f  i n c l u d e s land uses which  Commercial i n  Regional D i s t r i c t  Settlement  3)  " be d e f i n e d .  term undesirable  fringe  Okanagan  P r i o r t o a t t e m p t i n g t h e l a n d use a n l a y s i s , i t t h a t the term "undesirable  lands  generally  congestion,  noise  The  create  and  a  smell.  l a n d u s e s which c r e a t e t h e same n u i s a n c e , simply  attempts  land uses i n order  to  to test  sample  a  the v a l i d i t y  small of  the  statement.  A p r o b l e m which a r i s e s when c o n d u c t i n g any comparison i s  that  46  t h e r e a r e l i m i t a t i o n s which l i m i t t h e v a l i d i t y o f t h e s t u d y .  Some  l i m i t a t i o n s which a f f e c t t h i s s t u d y a r e : - t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land a f f e c t e d development i n b o t h f r i n g e a r e a s ;  reserve  has  - t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e abundance o r l a c k o f space i n t h e urban a r e a s has a f f e c t e d t h e development p a t t e r n i n t h e fringe areas; - t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e l a n d use p a t t e n s e s t a b l i s h e d p r i o r t o the establishment o f t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserve and E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' D ' Z o n i n g Bylaw have a f f e c t e d t h e development p a t t e r n i n the f r i n g e a r e a s .  Figures undesirable fringe  4 and 5 show t h e land uses.  a r e a has  pits).  It  s p e c i f i c use and l o c a t i o n o f  c a n be seen t h a t t h e  12 u n d e s i r a b l e  The Keremeos f r i n g e ,  u n d e s i r a b l e l a n d uses (not a n a l y s i s a step further,  land uses  (not  the  Okanagan F a l l s  including  gravel  on t h e o t h e r h a n d , h a s a t o t a l o f 23 including gravel  it  i s possible to  pits).  To t a k e  say t h a t i f  the  the land  uses a r e c o v e r e d b y a p r o v i n c i a l A c t , t h e n , t h e y can not be deemed undesirable.  F o r example, f r u i t s t a n d s i n t h e Keremeos f r i n g e  a r e a l e g a l use under B . C . R e g u l a t i o n 7/81 Agricultural  Land Commission A c t .  o f t h e B r i t i s h Columbia  Section  2(1) (a)  of  a l l o w s produce grown on t h e p r o p e r t y t o be s o l d from t h e Thus, this  the  number o f  undesirable uses i n  b a s i s o n l y numbers  10.  are  the  the  Act  property.  Keremeos f r i n g e  A t the present time,  on  there are  no  p r o v i n c i a l A c t s which a l t e r t h e number o f u n d e s i r a b l e d e s i g n a t i o n s o f t h e l a n d u s e s i n t h e Okanagan F a l l s f r i n g e In  conclusion,  it  is difficult  to  area.  say whether  become m e l t i n g p o t s f o r u n d e s i r a b l e l a n d u s e s . such as t h o s e examined h e r e , uses p r e v a l a n t  In  unzoned a r e a s circumstances  t h e r e a r e numerous u n d e s i r a b l e  land  i n b o t h t h e zoned and unzoned a r e a s s t u d i e d .  A map i l l u s t r a t i n g  the  z o n i n g d i s t r i c t s and t h e  undesirable  47  48  49 l a n d u s e s i n t h e Okanagan F a l l s f r i n g e a r e a shows a l l b u t 4 o f l a n d u s e s a r e s p e c i f i c a l l y p e r m i t t e d under t h e z o n i n g bylaw. F i g u r e 6) the  It  the (See  s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t one was i n e x i s t e n c e p r i o r  adoption  of  the  zoning  bylaw  and  is  thus  to  legally  non-conforming. Being l e g a l l y  zoned h a s  the  l a n d uses t o d e s i r a b l e o n e s .  effect  o f changing u n d e s i r a b l e  The reasons b e i n g t h a t :  A) the zoning p r o c e s s provides the public with the o p p o r t u n i t y t o be h e a r d i f t h e l a n d use i s not a d e s i r a b l e one, and B) z o n i n g p r o v i d e s r e g u l a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e s i t i n g , shape and s i z e o f s t r u c t u r e s which makes l i v i n g n e x t t o a commercial o r i n d u s t r i a l u s e not q u i t e as u n d e s i r a b l e as i f t h e r e were no r e g u l a t i o n s .  Whether t h e number o f u n d e s i r a b l e l a n d u s e s would be fewer z o n i n g were i n conjecture.  effect  in  t h e Keremeos f r i n g e  The l i m i t a t i o n s  of this  a n a l y s i s make i t  t o come t o any f i r m c o n c l u s i o n s about t h i s  2.2  area i s subject  if to  impossible  statement.  RESIDENTS STATEMENTS  2.2.1  Increased governmental r e g u l a t i o n w i l l r e s u l t i n a rural lifestyle  F o r t h e purpose o f a n a l y z i n g t h i s statement, to  review  the  rural  sociological literature  e m p i r i c a l evidence i s not S i n c e W o r l d War  II  the  i s necessary  because  first-hand  t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between urban and  have  produced t h e  d e c l i n e i n the  revolution  it  of  available.  environments  includes  loss  diminished.  industrialization  Changes which  r u r a l environments (kerr  et  al,  are  said  effects  1960),  to  rural have  on v a l u e s  organizational  ( B o u l d i n g , 1968; H a r t and S c o t t , 1975), and development  of post i n d u s t r i a l society ( B e l l ,  1968).  50  51  Mass cotimunication systems and modern t r a n s p o r t a t i o n methods a r e examples o f how t h e s e changes have caused a l e v e l l i n g on t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between urban and r u r a l l i f e s t y l e s al,  1973,36).  (Willits  a  common e x p e r i e n c e  to  Willits  et  al  that  (1973),  argues  persons  throughout  the  land.  i s o l a t i o n , which h i s t o r i c a l l y  t h e development o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n l i f e s t y l e s ,  has been  r e p l a c e d b y a c o n t i n u o u s i n t e r c h a n g e throughout t h e c u l t u r e . has  et  T e l e v i s i o n , r a d i o , newspapers, magazines and movies  provide  permitted  effect  resulted  in  the  elimination  of  distinctive  This  subcultural  patterns within society. While  improved modes o f  transportation  farmers t o t r a v e l t o t h e u r b a n a r e a s , r u r a l areas e a s i e r f o r u r b a n i t e s . there  are  now two t y p e s  work i n a r u r a l and s o c i a l i z e migration  has  differences In  of  easier  i t has a l s o made a c c e s s  G l e n n and H i l l  rural  it  resident;  in  urban  furthered  conclusion,  person  or  those t h a t  live  areas. the  The e f f e c t elimination  1977;  of  this  of  the  Smith and P e t e r s e n ,  t h a t the  r e s i d e n t s statement  group o f  it  is  very  persons are  difficult  urban-rural rural-urban 1980).  i s wrong.  Increased  Therefore,  cited  a n a l y s i s , one c a n not  of  Electoral  regardless  Area  to  rural  conclude t h a t  a  wrong when d e a l i n g w i t h human  perceptions.  residents  and  a review o f the r u r a l s o c i o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e  However,  in this  to  (1977) n o t e t h a t  governmental r e g u l a t i o n does not b r i n g about a l o s s o f t h e lifestyle.  for  a r e a and t h o s e who l i v e i n a r u r a l a r e a b u t work  (Glenn and H a l l ,  would i n d i c a t e  make  'G'  of  the  factual  information  d i s p r o v e t h e way t h e perceive  their  R e s i d e n t s s i m p l y respond t o t h e r e s u l t i n g e f f e c t s .  rural  situation.  52  2.2.2  I n c r e a s e d b u r e a u c r a c y means i n c r e a s e d t a x e s .  To b e t t e r made o f  conceptualize t h i s  statement  a comparison w i l l  t h e c o s t s o f p r o v i d i n g r e g i o n a l governmental  Electoral  /Area  ' G , which has 1  very  few  services,  E l e c t o r a l A r e a which u s e s most s e r v i c e s o f f e r e d District.  Before  analyzing  the  costs  of  services  with  to  another  by t h e  the  be  Regional  functions  a  d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e p r o c e s s u s e d t o a c q u i r e t h e o p e r a t i n g funds f o r the i n d i v i d u a l functions i s i n order. Since normal  the  Regional D i s t r i c t  procedure  functions  is  as  used  to  its  budget  specific  c o s t breakdowns  electoral area. of  of  functions  commercial,  of  for  Regional  coming the  for  year  which  must must  functions  for  then  amount other  Taxes  then  fixes  a  tax  include in  lands  for  each  Ministry to  the  regional  government  each e l e c t o r a l  rate  and a g r i c u l t u r a l  for  provincial  i s then e s t a b l i s h e d f o r  first  forwarded  needed  the  particular  District  individual  combines t h e  required  industrial  Regional  requested.  that  A total  electoral area.  the  funds  The r e q u i s i t i o n i s  Taxes who  The S u r v e y o r  The  the  authority,  They t h e n submit t h i s r e q u i s i t i o n t o t h e  with  functions.  The  for  Municipal A f f a i r s .  Surveyor  acquire  follows.  finalize  i s not a t a x i n g  area.  residential,  specific to  each  The t a x e s a r e t h e n c a l c u l a t e d f o r each p r o p e r t y . District  is  Of c o u r s e , t h i s  then  al o t t e d  the  funds  which  i s a s i m p l i f i e d v e r s i o n , but i t  g i v e an i n d i c a t i o n o f t h e p r o c e s s which i s  it does  followed.  T a b l e 1 i t e m i z e s t h e e s t i m a t e d c o s t s f o r each f u n c t i o n w i t h i n the  Regional D i s t r i c t  purpose  of  analyzing  o f Okanagan-Similkameen f o r 1983. this  statement,  the  costs  For  required  the to  A N A L V S u OF 1983 R E Q U I S I T I O N BASED OH 1 9 8 3 ASSESSMENT Recyclin? M u n i c ' p a I i t ies  Hospital  Genera 1 Admi n.  Elect. Admin.  Fi re Prot.  Buildinq lnsp.  Refuse Disposal  O.K.Falls Economic  P I a n n i ng Zoning  Sewer &  level opren t  64,407  72,605  16,003  36,775  8,109  161,847  Pest Control  Pen t i c t o n 292,240  Knapweed  2.782$ 31.833  Arenas tecreation ts)  86,037  16,685  21,376  4,146  5,915  10,833  2,100  500  21,241  1,398  4.283  79.553  V  OBWB  Transit  Fisca 1 R00S 1 Services Office  TOTAL  122,750  1,810,436  20,715  2,609,734  30,496  562,033  5,147  717.721  144,872  2,608  238.75F  25,179  1.737  193.307  457,899  2.858  684,15£  273,757  728  329,341  3,329,867  33,793  4,773,01!  30,224  1 ,413  138.80'  2,300  510  18,775  8,044  2,985  329,482  41,726  4,770  196.204  28,990  1,354  84,097  20,832  1.147  64,771  1,158  37,512  Summer l a n d  Pri nceton  01 i v e r  24,501  Osoyoos  40,295  11,720  5,400  7,806  25,944  7,214  •1 I  t I  55,689  8,884  11,868 !  7,046  1  Keremeos  Total  Electoral  10,292  10,241  2,263  25,854  476,657  105,056  25,854  19.9iD  4,393  7,157  82.693  11,092  3,022  590  1,794  19,526  198.883  140,350  24,919  54,153  183,487  3,175  6,349  23,100  5,868  3,484  40,885  1,585  1,146  2,291  42,098  9,281  6,708  67,310  14,830  10,718  19,088  4,211  16,177  16,926  180,464  Areas  A  B  C  D  -  2,118  410  1,258  12,398  2,405  7,360  21,436  19,810  3,842  11.762  3,043  6,087  5.626  1,090  3.340  8,022  3.567  2,578  5,156  4,766  924  2.829  6,795  16,351  3,600  2,602  5,204  4,809  932  2,856  84,397  18,612  13,450  26,902  24,863  4 ,822  120  x  13,415  175,900  44,590  13,400 69,491  ^162.519  17,679  3.246  48,755  1,808 34,744  26,828  87,263  Total  272,488  60,079  43,420  175,900  86,840  150,581  80,258  14,425  26,828  33,009  252,159  67,240  3,246  GRAND TOTAL  749,145  165,145  43,420  201,754  106,366  349,464  220,608  39,344  26.828  87.162  435,646  247,704  3,246  221.187  5,986  2 4 3 , 1 15  0  394,226  19,323  1 .506,983  3,551 , 0 5 4 5 3 , 1 1 6  6,280.002  i-3  54  maintain  the  f u n c t i o n s o f E l e c t o r a l /Area ' F ' w i l l be compared t o  those o f E l e c t o r a l Area 'F'  'G'.  Figure  7 shows t h a t E l e c t o r a l A r e a  i s l o c a t e d j u s t west o f t h e C i t y o f P e n t i c t o n and the  Municipality  o f Summer l a n d .  E l e c t o r a l Area  District  ' G ' has been s e l e c t e d  f o r t h i s a n a l y s i s f o r t h e reasons t h a t i t h a s a p o p u l a t i o n to that of E l e c t o r a l Area  ' G ' and because i t  z o n i n g and b u i l d i n g bylaw,  similar  i s governed b y b o t h a  which according t o E l e c t o r a l Area  'G'  residents, w i l l increase taxes. After  reviewing  money  needed t o  areas  i s similar.  Table  maintain  1 it most  There a r e ,  which a r e i n need o r f u r t h e r Firstly, of  the  it  functions  however,  within  Board  this  (OBWB)  function.  function are  of e l e c t o r a l Area ' F  Control  table  and  taxpayers  E l e c t o r a l Area  must 'G  is  1  contribute.  t h e same i s t r u e f o r the F i s c a l S e r v i c e s f u n c t i o n .  under t h i s  Penticton  electoral  f o u r a s p e c t s o f the  not a p a r t o f t h i s f u n c t i o n and t h u s , does not  Included  both  of  explanation.  B a s i n Water  $6,795 towards  Secondly,  amount  should be noted t h a t E l e c t o r a l Area ' F ' i s a p a r t  Okanagan  contribute  can be seen t h a t t h e  1  the  residents  make t o t h e P e n t i c t o n R e c r e a t i o n C e n t r e ,  and D i s t r i c t  service.  the c o n t r i b u t i o n s  Retirement  Electoral  'G'  Centre does  not  and t h e  the  Penticton  contribute  to  Dog  these  services. Thirdly, Area  'G'  building as  it  is  quite  surprising that  does not have a b u i l d i n g inspector,  Electoral  investigation,  Area a  they  considering  i n s p e c t i o n bylaw and thus  c o n t r i b u t e approximately  'F , 1  regional  for  Electoral  this  district  function. employee  no  the same amount Upon said  Supplementary L e t t e r s P a t e n t f o r t h e R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t  further that  states  the that  Ul  56  a l l a r e a s must c o n t r i b u t e t o c e r t a i n f u n c t i o n s r e g a r d l e s s o f participation  in  assessed value  them.  of  land  Therefore,  a  sum  and iirprovements  is  determined levied  their  by  the  on E l e c t o r a l  Area ' G ' . Finally,  t h e same q u e s t i o n s a r e r a i s e d r e g a r d i n g t h e amounts  r e q u i r e d f o r t h e P l a n n i n g and Z o n i n g f u n c t i o n s . E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' does  not  function  maintain than  a z o n i n g bylaw b u t  does  Electoral  contributes  Area  'F .  more  Again,  1  to  this  further  i n v e s t i g a t i o n found t h a t t h e Supplementary L e t t e r s P a t e n t f o r  the  Regional d i s t r i c t requires that every e l e c t o r a l area contribute t h i s function regardless of t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Overall,  t h e r e s i d e n t s statement t h a t  means i n c r e a s e d t a x e s , " i s g e n e r a l l y t r u e .  to  it.  "increased bureaucracy However,  i n t h i s case  when d e a l i n g s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' and t h e c o s t s o f maintaining  the  z o n i n g and b u i l d i n g  functions,  the  statement  is  false.  2.2.3  Zoning r e g u l a t i o n s are consider r u r a l values.  To  determine  assumption,  I  designed  whether  will  for  rural  analyze  residents  an  existing  Okanagan-Similkameen Z o n i n g Bylaw. bylaws  contain  analyze  the  both  most  urban  rural  and  urban  areas  are  and  correct  Regional  do  in  not  their  District  of  Because most R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t  rural  zoning  zoning d i s t r i c t  district,  within  the  I  will  bylaw.  It  s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t t h e r e i s no one d i s t i n c t i v e boundary between what  is  an  urban  or  rural  zone.  However,  e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e purpose o f t h e r e g u l a t i o n , g a i n e d i n t o i t s urban o r r u r a l  by  offering  an  some i n s i g h t w i l l be  orientation.  B e f o r e a n a l y z i n g a s p e c i f i c bylaw,  a brief  overview o f  the  57  h i s t o r y o f zoning i n  North  /America  i s i n important  establishing  the context o f zoning today. New Y o r k ordinance  in  adopted 1916,  the  which  first  regulated  (Contemporary S t u d i e s P r o j e c t , profound  effect  comprehensive m u n i c i p a l height,  1983,  1091).  because soon a f t e r ,  adopted some form o f z o n i n g bylaw  area  and  zoning  land  use  T h i s enactment h a d a  most major  American  (Contemporary S t u d i e s  cities  Project,  1983,1094).  Z o n i n g q u i c k l y became an instrument o f m u n i c i p a l l a n d  use  but  control  gained  unincorporated areas. the  first  Project,  state  to  relatively  It  slow  wasn't u n t i l  authorize  county  acceptance  in  rural,  1929 t h a t W i s c o n s i n became zoning  (Contemporary  Study  1983,1094).  Zoning  was  neighborhoods conditions.  designed  and  to  prevent  As a r e s u l t ,  preserve  the  existing  deterioration  liveability  or  of  regulations  evolving  urban or  living  regulations  designed t o c o l l e c t i v e l y c o n t r i b u t e t o the q u a l i t y o f l i v i n g , become  a  major  residents,  concern  however,  (Goodman and F r e u n d ,  question  the  need  for  1968,429). these  have  Rural  liveability  r e g u l a t i o n s because t o them, d i s t a n c e i s t h e b u f f e r which p r o t e c t s their quality of living  ( G e t z e l and Thurow,  1979,54).  T h i s a n a l y s i s w i l l now s h i f t t o t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f an  existing  rural  zoning d i s t r i c t  Okariagan-Similkameen  contains  a r e q u e s t i o n a b l e as t o t h e i r will  be  adopted district  studied  is  in  of  in  Appendix E)  July the  any  bylaw  is  the  Regional  liveability  Area  The the  'D'  most  District  regulations  rural practicality.  Electoral 1971.  of  of  which  The bylaw which  Z o n i n g Bylaw  rural  whether  oriented  No. land  Forestry-Grazing D i s t r i c t .  100, use (See  T h i s d i s t r i c t has t h e l a r g e s t ndnimum p a r c e l s i z e  (50  58 acres) of a l l the farthest  l a n d use d i s t r i c t s and u s u a l l y a p p l i e s t o  from t h e urban c e n t r e s .  lands  Those a s p e c t s o f t h e bylaw which  1 rural  residents  Section  c i t e d as urban o r i e n t e d w i l l now be  12  (2)(e)  d e s e r v e s some ccmment.  It  identified.  regulates  the  e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a "Home O c c u p a t i o n " and s t a t e s : (e)  Home o c c u p a t i o n s , p r o v i d e d t h a t ( i ) a home o c c u p a t i o n s h a l l be conducted w h o l l y w i t h i n a b u i l d i n g or accessory b u i l d i n g ; (ii) there shall be no exterior display or a d v e r t i s e m e n t , e x c e p t a s p r o v i d e d b y s u b s e c t i o n (10); (iii) t h e r e s h a l l be no e x t e r i o r s t o r a g e o f commodities, o r f i n i s h e d p r o d u c t s ; (iv) t h e use s h a l l not generate problems w i t h i n t h e D i s t r i c t ;  traffic  materials,  or  parking  (v) t h e use s h a l l n o t produce p u b l i c o f f e n s e o r n u i s a n c e o f any k i n d , b y any means;  These a r e t h e same r e g u l a t i o n s w h i c h a p p l y t o a home o c c u p a t i o n i n a  single  family  regulations  residential  don't  remoteness  of  dwelling.  In  a  change home  zone and i s  in  q u e s t i o n a b l e why  accordance w i t h  occupation  to  an  these  the  closeness  or  adjacent  property  or  t h a t way r e g u l a t i o n s g o v e r n i n g home o c c u p a t i o n s  r u r a l a r e a s would t a k e a c c o u n t o f t h e s i z e o f t h e p r o p e r t i e s ,  in and  be l e s s s t r i n g e n t t h a n t h a t r e q u i r e d f o r s m a l l e r s i z e d p r o p e r t i e s i n urban a r e a s . Section buildings  12  (6)  regulating  the  "Yards and S e t b a c k s " o f  c o n s t r u c t e d on l a n d w i t h i n  b a f f l e d many a r u r a l r e s i d e n t . t h i s o u t as an urban o r i e n t e d  this  zoning d i s t r i c t ,  S u b s e c t i o n (a)  in particular,  all has sets  regulation.  (1) i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d w h i l e o f Okanagan-Similkameen  employed by t h e R e g i o n a l  District  59  (a) On any l o t o r s i t e , a l l b u i l d i n g s s h a l l be setback from t h e f r o n t and r e a r l o t l i n e s a d i s t a n c e e q u a l t o t h e h e i g h t o f t h e b u i l d i n g , o r t h i r y (30) f e e t , w h i c h e v e r i s g r e a t e r , and n o t l e s s than f i f t e e n (15) f e e t from an i n t e r i o r o r exterior side lot l i n e .  While  such a  that  all  r e g u l a t i o n may be worthwhile  i n an urban a r e a ,  houses a r e uriiforrruy p l a c e d on t h e  question the  need f o r  uniformity  when t h e  property,  lots  are  so  residents  50 a c r e s  in  a r e a and o v e r . Section questioned.  12  (7),  regulating  "Site  Coverage"  is  also  This regulation states:  (7) On any l o t o r s i t e , p r i n c i p a l and a c c e s s o r y b u i l d i n g s t o g e t h e r s h a l l not occupy more than twenty (20) p e r c e n t o f the l o t o r s i t e area.  Realistically, permitted district,  20 p e r c e n t o f  uses it  cited  50 a c r e s i s  within  10 a c r e s and g i v e n t h e  subsection  (2)  of  this  zoning  i s u n l i k e l y t h a t a s t r u c t u r e t h a t b i g would ever be  built. Section  12  (8),  regulating  "Height  Limitations"  r e g u l a t i o n w h i c h i s more u r b a n o r i e n t e d t h a n r u r a l .  It  is  another  states:  (8) On any l o t o r s i t e , no b u i l d i n g s h a l l exceed a h e i g h t e q u a l t o t w e n t y - f i v e (25) p e r c e n t o f t h e l o t o r s i t e d e p t h , o r s i x t y (60) f e e t , w h i c h e v e r i s l e s s , e x c e p t t h a t i n no case s h a l l d w e l l i n g s exceed a h e i g h t o f t h i r t y - f i v e (35) f e e t .  Again,  we  see a  regulation  which  is  more s u i t e d  to  an u r b a n ,  s i t u a t i o n where c o n f o r m i t y o f s t r u c t u r e s may be p r e f e r r e d . as a r u r a l r e g u l a t i o n ,  rural residents question i t s  As f a r  practicality.  They say t h a t p e o p l e have good reasons f o r b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e s s i z e and shape t h e y d o , size  of  rural  s o why r e g u l a t e  them.  Furthermore,  the the  l o t s u s u a l l y a l l o w s enough space between neighbors  so t h a t t h e h e i g h t o f someones s t r u c t u r e w i l l  not i n t e r f e r e  with  60  an adjacent property owners r i g h t t o l i g h t or a i r . The f i n a l regulation of t h i s zoning d i s t r i c t t o be questioned i s subsection (9) which regulates the "IXLinimum F l o o r Area".  It  states: (a) No dwelling unit, other than a mobile home, s h a l l have f l o o r area of less than seven hundred f i f t y (750) square feet. (b) No mobile home s h a l l have a f l o o r area of less than two hundred f o r t y (240) square feet.  This uniformity seeking regulation rural.  i s more urban oriented than  Rural residents have noted that i f a person wants t o b u i l d  a small house, why  shouldn't i t be allowed?  In an urban area, a  smaller than average house could have a negative e f f e c t on the value of adjacent houses.  However, i n an area where the iruriimum  p a r c e l s i z e i s 50 acres i t i s u n l i k e l y that the s i z e of one house w i l l a f f e c t the a value of a neighboring parcel. Overall, one would have t o agree with the residents statement that  "zoning regulations are designed f o r urban areas".  studying the most r u r a l zoning d i s t r i c t of E l e c t o r a l Area Zoning Bylaw No. reulations  which  100,  After 'D , 1  i t can be said that there were numerous  could  be  questioned  application i n a r u r a l area.  for  their  But t h i s does not  practical necessarily  invalidate any form of zoning i n r u r a l areas. 3.0  REVIEW QF ALTERNATIVES TO THE STANDARD ZONING BYLAW  This chapter w i l l investigate f i v e alternatives t o the standard zoning bylaw. insights  A on  review their  negative aspects. suitability  of the  l i t e r a t u r e on  various d e f i n i t i o n s The  chapter w i l l  o f implementing  each alternative w i l l along with  their  provide  positive  and  conclude with a discussion of the  each a l t e r n a t i v e as a land use  control i n  61  E l e c t o r a l Area ' G ' . One i m p o r t a n t  limiting  f a c t o r which s h o u l d be mentioned a t t h e  outset  i s t h a t many o f t h e r e p o r t s c i t e d i n t h e reviews have been w r i t t e n from t h e perspective  of  American  land  use  law.  This  can  make  a  significant  difference  i n how t h e s e a l t e r n a t i v e l a n d use c o n t r o l s a r e d e s c r i b e d .  reason f o r  this,  the  whereas,  crown,  entrench  the  property. identify  3.1  attitude  the United S t a t e s , that  land  owners  the are  B i l l of outright  throughout t h i s c h a p t e r ,  of  R i g h t s has h e l p e d owners  of  their  an attempt w i l l be made t o  DEVELOPMENT PERMIT  development It  and was  to  (Porter,  repealed  for  (Porter,  1973,106).  After  off  and on h i s t o r y  in  British  more  innovative  1973,104).  municipal  But t h e  land  use  concept f a i l e d  and  to  gain  as e x p e c t e d due t o some c o n f u s i o n and doubt as t o what  t h e development  contract.  h a s h a d an  i n t r o d u c e d i n 1968 as S e c t i o n 702A o f t h e M u n i c i p a l  provide  the a c t i v e i n t e r e s t was  permit  was f i r s t  development c o n t r o l s  use  in  Therefore,  Columbia.  it  t h a t i n Canada, l a n d owners a r e viewed as t e n a n t s  aspects which are only a p p l i c a b l e i n the United S t a t e s .  The  Act  is  The  So,  permit  only  six  in  the  spring of  the  government  l e g i s l a t i o n and r e p l a c e d i t w i t h t h e  years,  legislation  c o n t r a c t s was r e p l a c e d by new development p e r m i t remains i n f o r c e t o d a y ,  1971  S i n c e 1977,  authorizing  land  land use  l e g i s l a t i o n i n 1977 which  a number o f r e p o r t s have been w r i t t e n  which d e s c r i b e t h e p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s o f t h e development  permit  as a l a n d u s e c o n t r o l t e c h n i q u e . The development p e r m i t h a s been d e f i n e d b y a number o f a u t h o r s . Harkness  (1973,43) d e s c r i b e s i t  variations  to  be made  to  the  Gary  as a supplementary r e g u l a t i o n which a l l o w s existing  development  c o n t r o l bylaw.  This  a l l o w s C o u n c i l s t o b e t t e r accomodate p r o j e c t s r e q u i r i n g s p e c i a l t r e a t m e n t , considering  such elements  as  siting,  design,  servicing or  environmental  62  features  (Harkness,  1979,43).  W i l s o n (1979) and Urban Land Management L t d .  (1979) d e s c r i b e two t y p e s  o f development p e r m i t s w h i c h may be u s e d i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a .  The f i r s t  is  t h e v o l u n t a r y o r s i t e development p e r m i t w h i c h a l l o w s t h e d e v e l o p e r , a t h i s option, of  t o apply f o r the waiving,  changing o r augmenting o f c e r t a i n a s p e c t s  t h e z o n i n g o r s u b d i v i s i o n c o n t r o l bylaws  1979,19).  W h i l e t h e development p e r m i t may a l l o w more f l e x i b i l i t y  z o n i n g bylaw,  it  second t y p e  development p e r m i t . environmental, (Urban  of  this  design or  case,  siting  Ltd.,  owners must a p p l y t o  land  1979,39).  development p e r m i t  In  Land Management  property  than the  may not v a r y t h e p e r m i t t e d uses o r d e n s i t i e s o f t h e  use p e r s c r i b e d b y t h e z o n i n g (Wilson, The  (Urban Land Management L t d . ,  is  the  compulsory o r  area  C o u n c i l designates areas w i t h s p e c i a l  conditions  as  development  development  permit permit  areas  1979,19).  In  areas,  council to  o b t a i n a development p e r m i t  in  a d d i t i o n t o t h e normal b u i l d i n g p e r m i t o r s u b d i v i s i o n a p p r o v a l (Urban Land Management L t d . , regulate the  1979,19).  Once a g a i n ,  the  development p e r m i t  can o n l y  d e s i g n and s i t i n g and c a n not v a r y use o r d e n s i t y p e r s c r i b e d b y  applicable  zoning or  Urban Land Management L t d . ,  s u b d i v i s i o n c o n t r o l bylaw  (Wilson,  1979,39  and  1979,19).  As w i t h a l l forms o f l a n d use c o n t r o l , t h e r e a r e p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e aspects.  The most o f t e n  flexibility.  cited benefit  G o l d b e r g and Horwood  o f the  development p e r m i t  (1980,96) p r a i s e t h i s  is  its  alternative  for  its flexibility  i n a l l o w i n g p r o p o s a l s t o be e v a l u a t e d on t h e i r  While  (1979,43)  Harkness  is  encouraged t h a t  imaginative  and  own m e r i t s . innovative  p r o p o s a l s , w h i c h might not have been a c c e p t a b l e under t h e s t a n d a r d z o n i n g bylaw,  may be  legislation  as  variances that  approved. a  step  do not  in  Wilson the  affect  (1979,41)  right  the  sees t h e  direction  development  because i t  allows  permit minor  u s e and d e n s i t y r e g u l a t i o n s o f a z o n i n g  bylaw w i t h o u t t h e n e c e s s i t y o f p u b l i c h e a r i n g s .  63  It  i s r a r e t h a t when a l a n d use c o n t r o l c o n f e r s a b e n e f i t on .some t h a t  others  d o n ' t view  permit.  it  Harkness  negatively. (1979,43)  Such i s t h e  recognizes  case w i t h the  that  flexibility  development  can  lead  to  u n c e r t a i n t y w h i c h c r e a t e s d e l a y and h i g h e r c o s t s .  T h i s p r o b l e m i s expanded  on by  state  Urban Land Management  Ltd.  (1979,20)  who  c o n s t r u c t i o n always v a r y from o r i g i n a l p l a n s . requiring  that  the  development p e r m i t , "  development it  be  that  details  of  Thus, w i t h the M u n i c i p a l A c t  "strictly  may be n e c e s s a r y f o r  in  accordance  with  the  the developer t o r e t u r n  to  c o u n c i l on numerous o c c a s i o n s t o o b t a i n p e r m i s s i o n t o change minor i t e m s . The permit  fact  that  no p u b l i c h e a r i n g  i s s u e d h a s b e e n noted  required  as a p o s i t i v e  However, Urban Land Management L t d . considering that i t  is  for  aspect  each  of  development  the  (1979,19) q u e s t i o n s i t s  legislation. legal  validity  i s a form o f z o n i n g .  The f i n a l n e g a t i v e a s p e c t noted p e r t a i n s t o t h e f a c t t h a t  registering  t h e development p e r m i t d e s i g n a t i o n on t h e p r o p e r t y ' s t i t l e i s n o t r e q u i r e d . Urban Land Management development parcels  permits  Ltd.  (1979,20)  may a f f e c t  the  call  value  governed by a development p e r m i t  attention of  the  to  the  land.  fact  Therefore,  s h o u l d have t h i s  fact  that all  l i s t e d on  the land t i t l e . Overall,  of  upon development Horwood  (1980,96)  alternatives,  3.2  t h o s e who have s t a t e d  an o p i n i o n ,  permits  l a n d use c o n t r o l .  even  as  go  a  as  form o f far  as  to  say t h a t  most l o o k  "of  favourably  G o l d b e r g and  all  the  zoning  we advocate t h i s o n e " .  FLOODPLAIN ZONING  S i n c e the beginning o f regularity.  recorded time,  f l o o d s have been r e p o r t e d w i t h  E a r l y c i v i l i z a t i o n s used t o depend on f l o o d s t o d e p o s i t new,  r i c h s o i l on t h e f l o o d p l a i n i n o r d e r t o grow t h e i r  crops.  Over t h e y e a r s ,  64  man h a s c o n v e r t e d t h e s e a g r i c u l t u r a l  and open space uses t o  residential,  commercial and i n d u s t r i a l u s e s . In  the  past,  the  most  corrtron method o f p r o t e c t i n g  u s e s was t o b u i l d dams, c h a n n e l s and l e v e e s .  Unfortunately,  a r e v e r y c o s t l y and a r e n o t always e f f e c t i v e Lauf of  these  (Burnett  floodplain  t h e s e schemes  and Hansen,  1982,3).  (1970,69) expands on t h i s a s p e c t b y s t a t i n g t h a t not o n l y i s t h e c o s t  f l o o d c o n t r o l p r o j e c t s very h i g h , but  rescue  and r e l i e f  contamination  efforts,  hazards  and  so are the costs a s s o c i a t e d w i t h  periodic cessation of business, disruptions  of  pollution  transportation.  and  Today,  a d i x d n i s t r a t o r s a r e t u r n i n g t o z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e s as t h e method o f  preventing  l o s s e s t o p e o p l e and p r o p e r t y from f l o o d i n g . Hinds e t a l  (1979,34) s t a t e t h a t t h e r e a r e t h r e e b r o a d p u r p o s e s which  f l o o d p l a i n zoning w i l l accomplish. 1) T o p r e v e n t o b s t r u c t i o n s t o water s t r e a m s . 2)  To a) b) c)  the  flow  of  f l o o d waters  against Island  fresh  p r e v e n t l o s s e s o f l i f e and p r o p e r t y from: f r e s h water f l o o d i n g , t i d a l f l o o d i n g , and storm d r i v e n waves a l o n g exposed c o a s t s  3) T o rrujiimize governmental e x p e n d i t u r e s r e s c u e , r e l i e f and r e c o n s t r u c t i o n .  There  along  are  two  techniques  f l o o d damages. Statewide  employed  The f i r s t  in  for  floodplain  i s a structural  P l a n n i n g Program  protective  works,  zoning t o  protect  technique.  " T e c h n i c a l Paper"  The Rhode  (1979,4)  notes  that  t h i s t e c h n i q u e r e q u i r e s houses and o t h e r s t r u c t u r e s t o be b u i l t on p i l i n g s . The second t e c h n i q u e i s n o n - s t r u c t u r a l , areas  susceptible to  flooding.  In  it  this  w i t h o u t endangering p r o p e r t y o r human l i f e Crawford  (1969,148)  and t h e  encourages development away from way,  excess w a t e r  (Crawford,  Rhode I s l a n d  can run  off  1969,148).  Statewide  P l a n n i n g Program  (1979,4) support t h e n o n - s t r u c t u r a l method o f f l o o d p l a i n z o n i n g and suggest  65 the  floodplain  conservation  areas  be  zones.  In  this  damage from h i g h w a t e r s . (1977) point  designated way,  as the  agricultural, uses  recreational  would o n l y  sustain  and  limited  The U n i t e d S t a t e s E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n Agency  see n o n - s t r u c t u r a l methods as a p o s i t i v e measure b u t not from of  protecting  perspective  that  (U.S.E.P.A., A  without  and  structures.  buildings,  flood  They  waters  view  will  it  from  not  be  the  blocked  1977,3.10).  negative  ordinances  people  the  in  the  aspect  of  the  non-structural  United States,  technique  have been h e l d t o  owner o f any r e a s o n a b l e use o f h i s l a n d ( U . S . E . P . A . , Overall,  the  literature cited  n o n - s t r u c t u r a l zoning technique i s  in this  that  deprive the  some  property  1977,3.10).  r e v i e w has  t h e method t h a t  is  indicated that  is  espoused.  and Hansen (1982,4) c o n f i r m t h a t n o n - s t r u c t u r a l t e c h n i q u e a r e t h e  the  Burnett favoured  and most c o s t e f f e c t i v e measures f o r p r e v e n t i n g f l o o d damage.  Hinds e t  (1979,34)  should  do c a u t i o n  that  government  flcodplain  regulations  al  vary  according t o : 1) t h e l o c a l importance p l a c e d on f l o o d h a z a r d ,  and  2) t h e e x t e n t o f e x i s t i n g development i n t h e f l o o d p l a i n . 3) f l o o d p l a i n r e g u l a t i o n s s h o u l d r e p r e s e n t a compromise between g o a l s and r e a l i t i e s . 3.3  SPOT ZONES  There  is  a  considerable  method o f l a n d use c o n t r o l . However,  two  distinct  amount  of  literature  on  spot  z o n i n g as  Most d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e t e c h n i q u e a r e  definitions  continually  arise  which  a  similar.  provide  an  i n d i c a t i o n o f whether t h e authors view s p o t z o n i n g f a v o u r a b l y o r n o t . Firstly,  Crawford  (1969,92)  and H i n d s  et  al  (1979,53)  define  this  t e c h n i q u e as an a c t which c r e a t e s an i s l a n d o r a d i s t r i c t o f a s m a l l p a r c e l when i t  is  zoned i n  a manner s u b s t a n t i a l l y d i f f e r e n t  from t h e  l a n d which  66  surrounds  it.  Secondly,  Rafert  (1982,457)  and  the  United  States  E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n Agency (1977,3.7) t a k e a more o p i n i o n a t e d view o f s p o t z o n i n g when t h e y d e f i n e i t done f o r  the b e n e f i t  as the rezoning o f a small p a r c e l o f  land  o f t h e p r o p e r t y owner r a t h e r t h a n f o r t h e b e n e f i t  of  t h e n e i g h b o r s o r t h e p u b l i c as a whole. T h e r e have been r e p o r t s w r i t t e n w h i c h note b o t h t h e advantages o f technique  and  reasons  for  justifying  its  use  as  a  land  use  the  control.  G o l d b e r g and Horwood (1980,97) i n d i c a t e d f o u r advantages o f s p o t z o n i n g as a l a n d use c o n t r o l . 1) By r e z o n i n g i n d i v i d u a l p a r c e l s as i n t e r e s t i n g and h i g h q u a l i t y development p r o p o s a l s come f o r w a r d , we a l l o w f o r i n n o v a t i o n and e x p e r i m e n t a t i o n , w h i l e moderating t h e n e g a t i v e e f f e c t s t h a t accompany unsuccessful attempts. 2) To contain r i s k , rezoning i n d i v i d u a l p a r c e l s allows f o r small s c a l e experiments w i t h rrdriimal d i s r u p t i o n s t o s u r r o u n d i n g p r o p e r t i e s and neighbourhoods. 3) S p o t z o n i n g erodes t h e quasi-monopoly p o s i t i o n t h a t z o n i n g has bestowed on p r o p e r t y owners and a l l o w s for c o m p e t i t i o n s among innovators. 4) The experiment i s w i t h i n w e l l d e f i n e d b o u n d a r i e s s o t h a t t h e entrepeneurs not society suffers if the experiment proves unsuccessful.  The l i t e r a t u r e reviewed c i t e d f i v e reasons f o r s p o t z o n i n g as a l a n d use c o n t r o l t e c h n i q u e . was s u p p l i e d by b o t h P i a t t spot  zoning  flexibility  is to  an the  (1969,92),  Rafert  (1978,115)  agree  about  zoning  zoning  spot in  tool  for  process.  (1982,458),  changes  to  of  Perhaps t h e most b a s i c r e a s o n  d e c i s i o n makers Hinds  Mandelker  zoning i s  spot zoning i f  the  et  al  (1970,83)  a valuable  compliance w i t h  (1982,35) a g r e e s and s t a t e d t h a t t h e receptive  t h e use  (1969,249) and Hughes (1982,34) who s t a t e d t h a t  important  that  justifying  the  because i t  (1979,54), and W r i g h t  instrument  Coitrmunity  adds  Crawford and Webber  in  Plans.  bringing Hughes  c o u r t s i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a r e more  zoning i s  related to  something b r o a d e r ,  67  such a s t h e cormunity p l a n . if  it  i s proposed t o  1969,92; R a f e r t ,  Almost a l l  further  public health,  1982,459; P i a t t ,  Webber,  1978,116).  Wright  and Webber  f e l t t h a t s p o t z o n i n g was safety  1969,249; Mandelker,  (1978,116)  who  felt  that  hearings  opportunity note  that  had  been  t o be h e a r d . the  justification  size of  of  site  (Piatt, is  and  the  area  percieved  as  be  was  a  debated. the  Piatt  to  s p o t z o n i n g by t h e  1969,250).  that  An f i n a l l y ,  C o u r t s are more f a v o u r a b l y large  held  it  (Crawford,  1979,83; W r i g h t  The f o u r t h r e a s o n was s u p p l i e d b y P i a t t  p r o v i d e d t h a t a z o n i n g i s s u e h a d been f a i r l y public  and w e l f a r e  justified  (1969,250) and  useful  technique  I n o t h e r words,  public  was  given  courts.  has  It  a  bearing  would  appear  that  ample  (1969) and Mandelker  rezoned  and  (1970)  on  the  that  U.S.  i n c l i n e d t o approve r e z o n i n g when t h e p a r c e l Mandelker  useful  in  (1970,83) e x p l a i n s t h a t t h e s i z e o f  protecting  neighbours  from  any  is the  harmful  consequences. The n e g a t i v e authors  as  technique  have is  zonings  a s p e c t s have the  that  are  positive.  it  is  sometimes  political  power.  (1969,92)  complain  r e c e i v e d about One o f  abused.  Hinds  motivated  Similarly, that  spot  the  by  et  those  as much a t t e n t i o n from primary  al  (1979,54)  who  Wright  and Webber  zoning  singles  t r e a t m e n t and s e t s up a monopoly s i t u a t i o n .  criticisms  want  state  of  the  that  personal  spot  gain  it  as  controls  a carpromise  of  the  and  Crawford  a parcel  for  special  out  G o l d b e r g and Horwood (1980,97)  s t a t e t h a t spot zoning f l i e s justification uses  and  basic principles  (Goldberg and Horwood,1980,97).  of  zoning  Hinds et a l  They  and l a n d use  (1979,53) agree  i n t h e f a c e o f the b a s i c U . S .  classification.  Spot  development zoning  in  obviously  a  similar represents  manner  and  Constitutional  o f z o n i n g as a d e v i c e f o r c l a s s i f y i n g s i m i l a r p r o p e r t i e s  regulating  or  (1978,115)  argue t h a t s p o t z o n i n g i s t h e u l t i m a t e bane o f the z o n e r s e x i s t e n c e . view  the  within  anything  but  and  each uniform  68 t r e a t m e n t (Hinds e t a l , 1 9 7 9 , 5 3 ) . criticize  spot  zoning  for  Finally,  its  approach  Hughes (1982) and R a f e r t to  planning.  Rafert  (1982)  (1982,457)  n o t e s t h a t /American c o u r t s have condemned s p o t z o n i n g as t h e a n t i t h e s i s p l a n n e d development,  as the p r o p o s e d use i s  either  s u r r o u n d i n g u s e s o r does n o t conform w i t h t h e (1982,34) on t h e  other hand,  of  inconsistent with  comprehensive p l a n .  the  Hughes  denounces s p o t z o n i n g s p i e c e m e a l approach t o  planning. Overall,  t h e p r a c t i c e o f s p o t z o n i n g has been p e r c i e v e d as a method o f  avoiding r i g i d i t y necessary  and has even been espoused b y Canadian c o u r t s as b e i n g  (Milner,  1962b,47).  have not a c h i e v e d u n i f o r m i t y sinister  connotations  Regardless planners  of  its  have  Whereas,  generally  the United  States,  the  courts  i n d e f i n i n g s p o t z o n i n g and t h u s , view i t  (Rafert,  seeming  in  1982,465;  acceptance  by  been h e s i t a n t  Hinds the  in  et  Canadian  recommending  al,  with  1979,53).  judicial  system,  its  (Milner,  use  1962b, 4 7 ) .  3.4  CONTRACT ZONES  C o n t r a c t z o n i n g was i n t r o d u c e d i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n e a r l y 1971 the  government  recinded  legislation  authorizing  an  early  development p e r m i t .  T h i s l e g i s l a t i o n gave C o u n c i l s t h e a u t h o r i t y  into  developers  contracts  mutually  with  agreed  upon.  usually  agrees  not  certain  period of  to time.  which  Meshenberg change  the  Hinds e t  contained  (1976,40) zoning al  conditions  notes  either  in  (1979,108) c i t e  that  form  of  to  enter  which may the  perpetuity t h a t the  provision additional  setbacks o v e r and above what i s r e q u i r e d  of  expected  private  bylaw. party  The  result  is  a  cooperative  and t h e m u n i c i p a l z o n i n g a u t h o r i t y  effort  be  community or  for  a  developers  p a r t i n the c o n t r a c t u s u a l l y i n v o l v e d r e s t r i c t i n g usage, o r h e i g h t ,  the  after  or  i n the  the text  between  t o accommodate the  a  needs  69  and d e s i r e s o f t h e l o c a l government, t h e p r o p e r t y owner and t h e n e i g h b o r i n g l a n d owners  (Bailey,  1965,914).  O f a l l t h e l i t e r a t u r e reviewed, p o s i t i v e aspects noted.  Meshenberg  t h e r e have been o n l y a s m a l l number o f (1976,41) has o b s e r v e d t h a t t h e  C o u r t s a r e now u p h o l d i n g more c o n t r a c t t h r e e reasons f o r  zones t h a n e v e r b e f o r e .  U.S.  There  are  this:  1) t h a t t h e agreement was between t h e d e v e l o p e r commission r a t h e r t h a n t h e g o v e r n i n g body,  and t h e  planning  2) t h a t t h e c o n t r a c t p r o t e c t e d t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e n e i g h b o r s as w e l l as t h e d e v e l o p e r s , and 3) t h a t t h e c o n t r a c t was f o r good purpose (Meshenberg,  Bailey  (1965),  on t h e o t h e r h a n d ,  time f o r developers.  It  1976,41).  sees c o n t r a c t z o n i n g as a way o f s a v i n g  accomplishes t h i s  the  lengthy  use  c l a s s i f i c a t i o n were t o be s e t up f o r  i n two ways.  First,  and c o n f u s i n g s t a t u t e s w h i c h would be r e q u i r e d i f  treated differently  from t h e norm ( B a i l e y ,  it  avoids  a specific  each p a r c e l which needed t o 1965,914).  Secondly, i t  be  would  a l l o w t h e needs and d e s i r e s o f a l l  i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s t o be e x p r e s s e d and  accommodated a f t e r a p u b l i c h e a r i n g  (Bailey,1965,914).  While  the  literature  has  outlined  the  p o s i t i v e aspect of  this  t e c h n i q u e , t h e o v e r a l l tone o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n has g e n e r a l l y been n e g a t i v e . One o f t h e most s e r i o u s a l l e g a t i o n s l e v e l l e d a g a i n s t t h i s t e c h n i q u e i s t h a t it  b a r g a i n s away t h e c o u n c i l s p o l i c e power  (mesheriber,  1976,41).  Crawford  (1969,150) and B a i l e y (1965,903) b o t h note t h a t a l e g i s l a t i v e body any n o t s e l l i t s right to  legislate.  Land use c o n t r a c t s were o n l y i n e x i s t e n c e f o r i n B r i t i s h Columbia.  In 1977,  contract  in  legislation  the  a short period of  time  t h e P r o v i n c i a l government r e p e a l e d l a n d use Municipal Act  and r e p l a c e d  702AA a u t h o r i z i n g a new form o f development p e r m i t .  it  with  Section  Reasons f o r t h e  repeal  a r e v a r i e d , however, W i l s o n (1979,42) i m p l i e d t h a t t h e k e y r e a s o n was t h a t  70  t h e P r o v i n c i a l government was unhappy w i t h t h e wide r a n g i n g n e g o t i a t i o n  of  development p e r m i t t e d b y t h e l a n d use c o n t r a c t s .  3.5  CONDITIONAL ZONING  In  reviewing  the  literature,  c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g has r e c e i v e d a g r e a t  d e a l o f a t t e n t i o n from American a u t h o r s t h r o u g h t h e 1 9 7 0 ' s . this  of  l a n d use c o n t r o l t e n d t o v a r y o n l y s l i g h t l y and i s b e s t d e s c r i b e d b y  Porter  (1973,78) a s "the m u n i c i p a l p r a c t i c e o f g r a n t i n g r e z o n i n g s u b j e c t  c o n d i t i o n s as agreed between t h e p a r t i e s " . s t r e s s c e r t a i n aspects o f the technique. McGrath  (1978,11)  emphasize  that  the  a p p l i c a b l e t o one p i e c e o f p r o p e r t y surrounding  lands.  The  (1977,3.6) h i g h l i g h t s promise from t h e property this  Definitions  as  in  the  United fact  I n d i v i d u a l d e f i n i t i o n s tend F o r example, M i l l e r  conditions  t h a t the  zoning.  While  every  Crawford  (1969,151)  provides  a  absolute  denial  and M i l l e r  source o f and  emphasizes  t h e c o n d i t i o n s a r e not  a u t h o r h a d p o s i t i v e comments about t h i s  c o n s i d e r e d a u s e f u l and f l e x i b l e (1978,125)  further  this  met  t h e z o n i n g change c o u l d be r e v e r s e d , o r v o i d e d .  can be c a t e g o r i z e d under two b a s i c t h o u g h t s .  Webber  the  P r o t e c t i o n Agency  t h a t t h e y w i l l n o t rezone  i s a one-way agreement b y n o t i n g t h a t i f  w i t h i n a s p e c i f i c time,  uniquely  owner does not r e c e i v e a b i n d i n g  l e g i s l a t i n g body s t a t i n g contract  imposed a r e  Environmental  to  (1972,99) and  and v a r y from t h e r e g u l a t i o n s f o r  States  to  for  (1972,105)  flexibility complete  tool  which  approval  First,  technique,  c o n d i t i o n a l zoning i s  l a n d use c o n t r o l .  concur t h a t affords of  an  a  they  Wright  conditional  middle  ground  application.  and  zoning between  Meshenberg  (1976,36) l a u d e s t h i s t e c h n i q u e because t h e comprehensive p l a n can be used as the  s o u r c e o f p o l i c i e s on which t o b a s e s p e c i f i c c o n d i t i o n s .  (1978,11)  sees  particularly;  conditional  zoning  as  a  flexible  land  use  McGrath tool,  71  1) in rural especially i f and 2) for proposals  Secondly, protect  areas f a c i n g new and s i g n i f i c a n t development p r e s s u r e s t h e a r e a h a s few o t h e r s o p h i s t i c a t e d t o o l s a v a i l a b l e ,  review  of  significant,  c o n d i t i o n a l zoning i s adjacent  large,  and  complex  l o o k e d upon f a v o u r a b l y f o r  properties.  Wright  and  Webber  development  its  ability  (1978,126)  point  o p t i m i s t i c a l l y t o t h e f a c t t h a t a c o n d i t i o n a l agreement r e q u i r e s t h e to  make  avoid  improvements  harm  to  which w i l l  neighbouring  surrounding a r e a .  justify  property  a  or  different to  the  to  owner  classification  planned  use  Meshenberg (1976,36) goes even f a r t h e r t o  and  of  the  say t h a t  the  c o n d i t i o n s attached t o the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s create a b u f f e r i n g e f f e c t  which  will  value  protect  adjacent  properties  from n e g a t i v e  impact  and l o s s  of  which c o u l d r e s u l t from a r e z o n i n g . /As can b e imagined when c o n d i t i o n s a r e mechanisms,  there  are  (1969,151), McGrath that  the  courts  nature  of  zoning  and  validating  the  are  negative  aspects.  skeptical of the  violates  rezoning the  lacks uniformity,  E u c l u d i a n concept.  1978,20; M i l l r t , 1 9 7 2 , 1 0 0 ;  Crawford  (1973,94)  Another  is  very  constituting  spot  obstacle  (Meshenberg, substantive,  agreements w i t h p r i v a t e  to  and S c o t t , 1 9 7 3 , 9 5 ) .  individuals  A third  negative  s i n c e a r e z o n i n g may i n v o l v e c o n s i d e r a b l e n e g o t i a t i o n  conditions  difficulty  by  c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g i s t h e t h r e a t t h a t l e g i s l a t i v e p o l i c e powers  aspect i s that exact  noted  control  c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g because b y t h e  a r e b e i n g b a r g a i n e d away b y c o l l a t e r a l (McGrath,  One  l a n d use  (1978,22), Meshenberg (1976,38) and S c o t t  process  thus,  also  attached t o  to  be a p p l i e d ,  1976,38).  Thus,  controlling with  the  Meshenberg,1976,38).  use  the  the  opportunities  lack of  conditional of  this  for  abuse  are  over  severe  s t a n d a r d s , b o t h p r o c e d u r a l and  rezoning technique  creates  considerable  (McGrath, 1978,23  and  72  Overall, zoning  is  a  it  appears  general  is  that  conditional  The p r i m a r y o b s t a c l e  to  l a n d use c o n t r o l appears t o be  As most o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e on c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g i s w r i t t e n b y  /American a u t h o r s not  development  a  true  known.  permits  perception However,  have been  of  in  how t h i s  view  techniques  literature cited  have  t e c h n i q u e would  the  the  way  spot  Canadian  fend  zoning  judicial  in  and  system,  well.  SUITABILITY OF ALTERNATIVES AS ELECTORAL AREA ' G ' .  As the  of  accepted by  c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g would l i k e l y f a i r  3.6  concensus  t e c h n i q u e a c c e p t e d as a v i a b l e  the c o u r t s .  is  the  l a n d use c o n t r o l which has m e r i t .  having t h i s  Canada  that  LAND  review has  indicated,  numerous  positive  USE  CONTROL  all and  o f the  TECHNIQUES  IN  l a n d use c o n t r o l  negative  aspects.  The  q u e s t i o n which must now be addressed i s whether any a r e s u i t a b l e as a l a n d use c o n t r o l  technique  for  E l e c t o r a l Area  'G'.  should provide h e l p f u l i n s i g h t i n t o which, i f As  already  noted  development p e r m i t s , already i n place. which  limit  S e c t i o n 717  the (3)  in  the  review  of  The l e g i s l a t i o n , however, use  of  and (5)  this  control  following  discussion  any, a r e t h e most s u i t a b l e .  the  provincial legislation  The  literature  authorizing  pertaining  this  to  technique  c o n t a i n s a number o f s e c t i o n s  technique  in  Electoral  Area  'G'.  o f t h e M u n i c i p a l A c t a u t h o r i z e s development p e r m i t s  t o be used as a supplementary r e g u l a t i o n t o an e x i s t i n g z o n i n g bylaw. result, Area  a z o n i n g bylaw which i s a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e  ' G ' would f i r s t  is  residents of  have t o be adopted and t h e n t h e  As a  Electoral  development  permit  p r o c e s s c o u l d b e i n s t i t u t e d as p a r t o f t h e z o n i n g bylaw. S e c t i o n 717  (3)  o f t h e M u n i c i p a l A c t , r e s t r i c t s t h e use o f  development  p e r m i t a r e a s t o a r e a s where s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s p r e v a i l w i t h r e s p e c t t o  the  p h y s i c a l environment o r i n d e s i g n o r s i t i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s .  This prohibits  the  large  outright  designating of  the  entire  electoral  area  or  portion  73  t h e r e i n as a development p e r m i t Existing limits  the  provincial  application  area.  legislation  of  if  development  it  is  a c c e p t e d as a  permits  as  an  constraint,  alternative  to  the  s t a n d a r d z o n i n g bylaw i n E l e c t o r a l /Area ' G ' . Floodplain  zoning  is  seen  l i t e r a t u r e t h a t was reviewed.  as  necessary  and e f f i c i e n t  damage and i n j u r i e s r e s u l t i n g from f l o o d s .  which  flow  in  'G'  the  (Map 1 ) ,  through  in  all  of  the  The n o n - s t r u c t u r a l c o n t r o l o f l a n d uses was  c o n s i d e r e d t o be t h e most e f f e c t i v e  of E l e c t o r a l Area  regulation  technique f o r  As can be seen on t h e a r e a map  t h e r e a r e numerous  this  area.  preventing  Of  note  c r e e k s and two is  the  fact  rivers  that  Similkameen and A s h n o l a r i v e r s a l o n g w i t h t h e Keremeos Creek a r e a l l  the prone  to flooding. At Titles  the Act  regulations however,  present requiring  provincial  that  imposed b y t h e  are  Therefore,  time,  not  all  new  Ministry  applicable  to  legislation  exists  subdivisions  adhere  of  Environment.  developments  on  literature  relatively  to  the  Land  floodplain  These  regulations,  existing  parcels.  f l o o d p l a i n z o n i n g s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as an a l t e r n a t i v e t o  s t a n d a r d z o n i n g bylaw o r i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h another The  under  has  receptive to  indicated  that  spot z o n i n g .  the  alternative.  Canadian  However,  the  judicial  i n most c a s e s ,  system  is  spot z o n i n g  has been i n i t i a t e d i n areas t h a t a r e governed by an e x i s t i n g z o n i n g bylaw. The use o f s p o t z o n i n g as an a l t e r n a t i v e i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' , p r e s e n t s a somewhat d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n . used t o r e s t r i c t the further north of  the V i l l a g e  As d e s c r i b e d i n c h a p t e r I,  to  o f Keremeos.  comply w i t h o r  Regional D i s t r i c t .  z o n i n g was  s u b d i v i s i o n o f t h e 360 a c r e b l o c k o f l a n d The important  r e s t o f t h e E l e c t o r a l A r e a i s unzoned. have  spot  apply  for  f a c t o r here i s that  As a r e s u l t ,  zoning,  it  The i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s  just the  the developer d i d not  was imposed on h i m b y f a c t are  the  s i g n i f i c a n t because  74  when z o n i n g i s imposed on one p r o p e r t y w h i l e t h e a d j a c e n t p r o p e r t i e s unzoned,  the  developer  has  a  reasonable  claim  that  he  has  remain been  discriirdnated against. Another that i t spot  limitation  to  the  use o f  i s always imposed a f t e r t h e  zoning  was  only  imposed  spot zoning i n  fact.  after  the  s u b d i v i s i o n was proposed p r i o r  is  As i n t h e example c i t e d above,  the  s u b d i v i s i o n a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e Department  an unzoned a r e a  developer  has  submitted  o f Highways f o r a p p r o v a l .  t o the  initiation  of  his Since  t h e z o n i n g bylaw,  t h e s u b d i v i s i o n does n o t have t o comply w i t h t h e p r o p o s e d r e g u l a t i o n s . Overall,  s p o t z o n i n g i n an unzoned a r e a ,  would not appear t o be r e a s o n a b l e As o u t l i n e d into  i n the l i t e r a t u r e review,  government  developments.  wanted  As a r e s u l t ,  E l e c t o r a l Area  to  contract  z o n i n g was  legislated  1971  b u t was r e p e a l e d  in  stop  the  negotiation  wide  ranging  1977 when  the over  i n s t i t u t i n g t h e l a n d use c o n t r a c t t e c h n i q u e  ' G ' would r e q u i r e the  Municipal  f  alternative.  use i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n  provincial  such as E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G '  a re-introduction  legislation  in  Act.  committments  c o u n c i l s are required t o  Also,  of  l a n d use  considering  the  in  contract binding  e n d o r s e , when u s i n g such a l a n d use  c o n t r o l technique, t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s not considered s u i t a b l e . The l i t e r a t u r e i s q u i t e p o s i t i v e i n i t s review o f c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g . The f a c t  that i t  i s mentioned as a t e c h n i q u e which i s f l e x i b l e  t o r u r a l a r e a s f a c i n g growing development p r e s s u r e make i t suitable.  However,  have t o e x i s t process. exists  i n the  Unlike for  much l i k e t h e development p e r m i t , area p r i o r  zoning,  appear even more  o v e r a l l z o n i n g would  t o implementation o f a c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g  development p e r m i t s ,  conditional  and s u i t e d  no p r o v i n c i a l  therefore,  if  this  enabling  legislation  t e c h n i q u e were  to  be  implemented, p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n would have t o be amended. Overall,  from t h e p o s i t i v e a s p e c t s n o t e d i n t h e r e v i e w ,  t h i s l a n d use  75 c o n t r o l t e c h n i q u e s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d as an a l t e r n a t i v e f o r E l e c t o r a l /Area •G'.  4.0  AN ALTERNATIVE:  4.1  INTRODUCTION  The  rural  residents  THE PROPOSED RURAL MMNTENANCE BYLAW  maintenance  with  a  suitable  bylaw method  has of  been  controlling  r e s u l t i n g from t h e s p r e a d o f u r b a n i z a t i o n . technique  will  essentially  respect  the  designed  to  provide  undesirable  A t t h e same t i m e ,  characteristics  of  an  l a n d uses  this  environment  rural  control  which  is  rural.  In an e f f o r t t o make the R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw as e a s i l y understood as p o s s i b l e , t h e c h a p t e r has been d i v i d e d i n t o this  introduction,  the  second s e c t i o n w i l l o u t l i n e  molded t h e d e s i g n o f t h e Bylaw. overview o f  fourth  d i f f e r e n c e s a r e between  section i s  detailed  analysis  section  describes  processed. be p o l i c e d . Maintenance  The t h i r d  the  Following  f a c t o r s which have  section w i l l provide a general  t h e a l t e r n a t i v e which w i l l d i s c u s s who w i l l a d m i n i s t e r  what t h e major The  seven s e c t i o n s .  and  perhaps t h e  method  and t h e  most important  justification  the  it  by  of  the  which  and  S t a n d a r d Zoning Bylaw. because i t  proposed bylaw.  an  it  amendment  bylaw  provides The  a  fifth  would  be  The n e x t s e c t i o n d e t a i l s how t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw w i l l The c h a p t e r w i l l Bylaw.  R u r a l Maintenance  Prior Bylaw i t  to  c o n c l u d e w i t h a sample o f delving  into  i s important  the  technical  t o understand t h e  an a c t u a l  Rural  aspects of  the  concept b e h i n d  the a l t e r n a t i v e which i s proposed. As  we h a v e  p o l i t i c i a n s to restrictive  seen i n  the  first  Chapter  I,  signs o f  l a n d use c o n f l i c t s i s t o impose a v e r y  S t a n d a r d Z o n i n g Bylaw.  t h a t t h e y would r a t h e r  let  the  reaction  of  both planners  The r e a c t i o n o f r u r a l  and  r e s i d e n t s shows  a few p r o p e r t y owners s u f f e r t h e e f f e c t o f  land  76 use c o n f l i c t s r a t h e r  than subject the  entire E l e c t o r a l Area t o  stringent  r e g u l a t i o n s which t h e y b e l i e v e a r e more s u i t e d t o an urban a r e a . II,  the  "Analysis  controls,  of  Statements"  shows t h a t  even w i t h o u t  p r o v i n c i a l regulations provide a certain  Chapter  l o c a l l a n d use  amount o f  c o n t r o l over  l a n d use b u t n o t enough t o c o n t r o l urban t y p e developments. The  following  Line  'A'  graph  on t h e  urbanization process, r e g u l a t i o n s which are conflicts.  Line  illustrates  the  graph shows t h a t  s i t u a t i o n w i t h i n E l e c t o r a l Area  as t h e  rural  of  experiences  the  t h e r e s h o u l d be i n c r e m e n t a l i n c r e a s e s i n t h e l a n d use r e q u i r e d t o adequately c o n t r o l p o t e n t i a l  urban-type  ' B ' on t h e graph d e p i c t s t h e quantum l e a p t o urban  l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n s p r o p o s e d i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a indication  area  conflicts  resulting  from  style  ' G ' a f t e r o n l y the  urbanization.  While  first  it  is  i m p o s s i b l e t o p l o t where t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw would be s i t u a t e d on the  graph,  it  h a s been d e s i g n e d t o  incremental b a s i s rather  4.2  increase  l a n d use  regulations  on  an  t h a n i n quantum l e a p s .  FACTORS AFFECTING THE DESIGN  There are four f a c t o r s which w i l l guide the design o f t h i s l a n d use c o n t r o l t e c h n i q u e .  Firstly,  the  alternative  a n a l y s i s o f statements  made b y  t h e R e g i o n a l P l a n n e r s and E l e c t o r a l A r e a r e s i d e n t s i n c h a p t e r two, w i l l be considered.  W h i l e t h e statements  made by t h e p l a n n e r s and r e s i d e n t s were  77  in  response t o q u e s t i o n s p e r t a i n i n g  to  a s p e c i f i c electoral area,  it  is  c o n s i d e r e d t h a t t h e views e x p r e s s e d would be s i m i l a r t o t h o s e which would be  obtained  Columbia.  in  other  Thus,  the  electoral intention  E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' and a p p l y i t  areas is  or  Regional D i s t r i c t s  in  British  t o draw from what h a s been l e a r n e d  in  t o t h e d e s i g n o f ,an a l t e r n a t i v e which would  be a p p l i c a b l e i n r u r a l areas throughout t h e p r o v i n c e . Secondly, on a l t e r n a t i v e  the  i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d from t h e r e v i e w o f t h e  forms o f  l a n d use c o n t r o l i n  The review has i l l u s t r a t e d alternatives British  Thus,  c h a p t e r t h r e e w i l l be u s e d .  b o t h t h e p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s o f  along w i t h aspects o f  Columbia.  literature  the  the  technical  intention  is  l e a r n e d i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' and a p p l y i t  to  feasibility  draw  of  each  from what has  t o t h e d e s i g n o f an  the in  been  alternative  w h i c h would be a p p l i c a b l e i n r u r a l a r e a s throughout t h e p r o v i n c e . Secondly, on a l t e r n a t i v e  the  i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d from t h e review o f t h e  forms o f  land use c o n t r o l i n  The review has i l l u s t r a t e d alternatives  along with  literature  c h a p t e r t h r e e w i l l be  used.  b o t h t h e p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e a s p e c t s o f  aspects o f  the  technical  feasibility  of  the  each  in  B r i t i s h Columbia. The t h i r d  factor  i s S e c t i o n 716  (2)  o f the M u n i c i p a l A c t .  In  order  t h a t t h e a l t e r n a t i v e may be t e c h n i c a l l y f e a s i b l e w i t h i n t h i s p r o v i n c e , alternative  must have due r e g a r d f o r  (a) t h e p r o m o t i o n o f h e a l t h , public;  safety,  (b) p r e v e n t i o n o f t h e o v e r c r o w d i n g o f a m e n i t i e s p e c u l i a r t o any z o n e ; (c)  the  t h e s e c u r i n g o f adequate l i g h t ,  (d) t h e v a l u e o f t h e l a n d and p r o s p e c t i v e u s e and occupancy;  convenience and w e l f a r e o f  the  l a n d and p r e s e r v a t i o n o f  the  a i r and a c c e s s ; the  nature  of  its  present  and  (e) t h e c h a r a c t e r o f each z o n e , t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e b u i l d i n g s a l r e a d y e r e c t e d and t h e p e c u l i a r s t a b i l i t y o f t h e zone f o r p a r t i c u l a r u s e s ; and  78 (f)  the c o n s e r v a t i o n o f property v a l u e s .  The f o u r t h both p r a c t i c a l  factor  i s the w r i t e r s  own p l a n n i n g e x p e r i e n c e .  and academic e x p e r i e n c e w i l l  provide  a  Years  subjective  of  factor  w h i c h w i l l a f f e c t what i s i n c l u d e d and what does n o t .  4.3  GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE ALTERNATIVE  Prior that  a  to  the  number  presented.  detailed  of  basic  This brief  analysis  of  the  alternative,  principles  of  the  Rural  description of  the  it  is  important  Maintenance  alternative  Bylaw  be  should provide  a  b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e bylaw. T h e r e w i l l be t h r e e p o i n t s d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n .  F i r s t , who w i l l  a d m i n i s t e r t h e bylaw, who w i l l have t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g power, and what i s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h e a l t e r n a t i v e Due t o t h e known, i t  fact  the  structure  of  the  t o t h e s t a n d a r d z o n i n g bylaw. s t a n d a r d z o n i n g bylaw i s  well  p r o v i d e s a good r e f e r e n c e f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g a mental image o f what  the a l t e r n a t i v e  4.3.1  that  finally,  will  entail.  A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f the The  Regional  Alternative  Districts  are  a d m i n i s t e r i n g the a l t e r n a t i v e . Districts zoning  presently  bylaw,  experience  in  oversee  some o r  s h o u l d be  felt  to  be  best  suited  for  Due t o t h e f a c t t h a t most R e g i o n a l the  all  used i n  administration  of  their  the  of  Electoral  administration  the  standard  Areas, of  the  their Rural  Maintenance Bylaw. 4.3.2  R e l a t i o n s h i p o f the A l t e r n a t i v e A  knowledge  Maintenance important o f the  of  the  basic  t o t h e S t a n d a r d Z o n i n g Bylaw differences  between  the  Rural  Bylaw and t h e S t a n d a r d Zoning Bylaw w i l l p r o v i d e  reference  alternative.  for  those t r y i n g t o understand the  an  structure  79  First, zoning  unlike  districts  the  are  standard  the  norm,  zoning the  bylaw,  Rural  lands  lands  which  located within  encompass  the  m u n i c i p a l i t y ' s boundaries. of  low  density  It  residential  the  Bylaw  is  Rural D i s t r i c t I  is  settlement  fringe  numerous  Maintenance  d e s i g n e d around o n l y a two d i s t r i c t c o n c e p t . comprised o f  where  area  plan  just  area  or  outside  a  a l s o i n c l u d e s l a n d w h i c h i s made up areas which  are  not  incorporated.  Examples o f a r e a s such as t h i s would be H e d l e y and O l a l l a w i t h i n E l e c t o r a l /Area ' G . 1  Rural  District  settlement contain  or  II  fringe  larger  lots  is  comprised  areas. and  of  lands  outside  Characteristically,  receive  less  pressure  these  for  the areas  small  lot  most  often  development. The found  in  second major  departure  the  z o n i n g bylaw  standard  from t h e is  " p r o h i b i t e d uses" rather than a l i s t o f  the  structure use  of  a  list  "permitted u s e s " .  of  While a  more d e t a i l e d e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e use o f p r o h i b i t e d u s e s w i l l be found i n t h e said  that  the  "Detailed Analysis of use o f  a list  the A l t e r n a t i v e " ,  o f p r o h i b i t e d uses more  s u i t s t h e r u r a l bylaw c o n c e p t and t h e use c o n t r o l i s t r y i n g t o Thirdly, standard  areas  the  primary  zoning  bylaw  or  sites  adequately  " p o s i t i v e " image t h i s  form  of  is  flexibility  the  where  special  built  development t h e use o f t h i s  conditions  in  the  into  development  permit  land  may  d e n s i t i e s o r the land use.  not  vary  the  permitted  the  permit. technique physical  environment o r i n d e s i g n o r s i t i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s e x i s t . the  can be  create.  Provincial legislation currently limits to  it  As w e l l , uses  The R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw,  or  however  80  proposes t o i n c o r p o r a t e a c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g t e c h n i q u e t o p r o v i d e flexibility.  While the d e t a i l s o f t h i s technique are explained  a later section, i t of  land  can be s a i d t h a t i t w i l l a l l o w f o r t h e  u s e s and d e n s i t i e s  on  some p a r c e l s  provided  in  varying  the  site  s p e c i f i c d e t a i l s s a t i s f y a l l concerned. F i n a l l y , w h i l e a major d e v i a t i o n from t h e use o f Standards t h e Bylaw i s n o t p r o p o s e d , i t alterations bylaw. the  the  The a n a l y s i s o f  fact  Acts  that  and  District  rural  normally  statements are  which  zoning bylaws.  s h o u l d be noted t h a t t h e r e w i l l be  standards  areas  regulations  standards,  4.4  made t o  in  in  chapter  regulated  are  found  often  in  2 has  a  highlighted  b y numerous dupicated  zoning  provincial  in  Regional  The s t r e a m l i n i n g o r e l i m i n a t i n g  o f some  forms an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw.  DETAILED ANALYSIS OF THE ALTERNATIVE  T h i s s e c t i o n e x p l a i n s and j u s t i f i e s t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw.  The f i r s t  t h e t h r e e major components o f component i s t h e use o f a  o f p r o h i b i t e d u s e s , t h e second i s t h e method o f p r o v i d i n g  list  flexibility,  and t h i r d i s t h e s t a n d a r d s w h i c h a r e t o be i n c l u d e d i n t h e Bylaw. It  s h o u l d be  developed  for  noted  Electoral  that  a  Rural  Maintenance  Bylaw has  A r e a ' G ' t o s e r v e as an example o f how  f o l l o w i n g components would appear i f w r i t t e n i n bylaw form. Maintenance Bylaw can be viewed i n t h e l a s t s e c t i o n o f t h i s  4.4.1  been the  The R u r a l chapter.  P r o h i b i t e d Uses The b a s i c permit  all  uses  restrictions. property  intent  of  except By  the  those  proposed land which  incorporating  owners w i l l ,  a  on one h a n d ,  are list be  use  seen t o of  control need  to  special  prohibited  allowed t o  is  develop  uses, their  81  property they  with  can be  restricted  limited  restrictions.  assured t h a t  an  While  adjacent  on t h e  property  other  hand,  owner w i l l  be  i n t h e development o f any u n d e s i r a b l e l a n d use w h i c h  could adversely a f f e c t neighbouring property. The P r o h i b i t e d use r e s t r i c t i o n i s d e s i g n e d w i t h two o f Regional  Planners  statements  "without z o n i n g , i t neighborhood  or  will  allow  Secondly,  for the  mind.  The  first  is  that,  i s d i f f i c u l t t o preserve the character of  area".  markedly d i f f e r e n t  in  the  By  prohibiting  land  uses which  the are  from t h a t w h i c h e x i s t s a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e ,  the  continuity  planners  fear  of  that,  the  area  to  be  it  preserved.  "unzoned a r e a s would become  melting pots for undesirable land uses",  would be q u e l l e d .  The  a n a l y s i s o f t h i s statement i n c h a p t e r two showed t h a t r u r a l a r e a s which are zoned, a l s o c o n t a i n undesirable land u s e s . requiring  the  objections  developer  are  to  go  through  h e a r d and i f  the  application i s  undesirable  then  it  can be  objections,  obviously the  refused.  the  If  l a n d use i s  zoning  process,  considered too  there  not  However, b y  are  generally  no  major  viewed  as  u n d e s i r a b l e and w i l l be p e r m i t t e d . Two r e s i d e n t s decision to list  of  statements  irnplement a  permitted  list  uses.  governmental  regulations  lifestyle".  While  the  have a l s o been c o n s i d e r e d i n of  p r o h i b i t e d uses rather  The  will  first  result  analysis,  in  in  is a  rural  lifestyle,  Therefore,  than  a  "increased of  two,  the  rural  showed t h a t  r o l e i n the loss of  t h e p u b l i c s t i l l p e r c e i v e s t h a t government  regulation i s a leading factor. analysis,  loss  chapter  t h e r e a r e o t h e r f a c t o r s which have a g r e a t e r the  that  the  Regardless o f the r e s u l t s o f  the  what t h e p u b l i c p e r c e i v e s must be t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t . by  noting  that  "all  uses are  permitted  except  the  82  f o l l o w i n g " , i t may have a more p o s i t i v e impact than i f they are t o l d t h a t "no other uses except the f o l l o w i n g are allowed" as i s o f t e n found under l i s t s of permitted uses. in  unzoned areas,  The f a c t t h a t , w h i l e  the proposal w i l l increase the amount of  government r e g u l a t i o n , i t i s hoped t h a t t h i s approach w i l l h e l p people perceive i t i n a p o s i t i v e manner. The second r e s i d e n t statement which has been considered i n the design o f t h i s land use concept was t h a t "zoning r e g u l a t i o n s are designed f o r urban areas and do not consider r u r a l values". While  the p r o h i b i t e d uses and  similar  permitted uses techniques  are  i n many ways, there are d i f f e r e n c e s which promote the  p r o h i b i t e d uses technique as the one which i s best s u i t e d t o the r u r a l area. to  Perhaps the best method o f n o t i n g these aspects i s  i d e n t i f y why  For one,  the permitted uses technique i s urban o r i e n t e d .  a l i s t o f permitted uses would appear t o be b e t t e r  s u i t e d t o a zoning bylaw t h a t has numerous land use  districts.  In urban areas where the pressure t o develop a property t o i t s most l u c r a t i v e use i s more intense than i n r u r a l areas, zoning bylaws  contain  numerous  zoning  districts.  Many  d i s t r i c t s are created w i t h only minor d i f f e r e n c e s .  of  these  For example,  there could be a m u l t i - f a m i l y zoning d i s t r i c t which permits only row houses, whereas, another m u l t i - f a m i l y zoning d i s t r i c t might not.  In such cases, l i s t i n g the permitted uses i s shorter and  l e s s confusing than i f the p r o h i b i t e d uses were l i s t e d . In the r u r a l areas, where there i s l e s s pressure t o develop the same number o f wide-ranging land uses, i t i s more p r a c t i c a l t o l i s t the p r o h i b i t e d uses.  83  A s f o r t h e method s e l e c t i n g p r o h i b i t e d u s e s t o be i n c l u d e d on the  list,  the  Director,  the  planner  should  enlist  help  of  the  Area  A r e a A d v i s o r y P l a n n i n g Commission and a l l  groups w i t h an i n t e r e s t i n l a n d u s e . themselves p l a y an important p a r t their  the  other  I n t h i s way, t h e r e s i d e n t s  i n the  f u t u r e development  of  area. The r e a l i t y  of  the p r o h i b i t e d uses, potential  c o m p i l i n g any l i s t , i s that i t  undesirable  "catch-all"  land  p h r a s e s must be  e s p e c i a l l y one  listing  i s almost i m p o s s i b l e t o note  uses.  Therefore,  included to  protect  one  or  area  all two  residents  from any " s u r p r i s e s " .  4.4.2  F l e x i b i l i t y of the  Alternative  F l e x i b i l i t y w i l l be b u i l t i n the  form o f  review  in  powers.  conditinal zoning.  chapter  flexibility  but  i n t o t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw  3,  the  does  As n o t e d i n  the  literature  c o n d i t i o n a l zoning technique provides  not  bargain  away a  councils  legislated  The onus i s on t h e d e v l o p e r t o a b i d e b y t h e c o n d i t i o n s  imposed b y t h e c o u n c i l o r t h e r e z o n i n g i s n o t a p p r o v e d . C o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g p r o v i d e s even more f l e x i b i l i t y technique permit.  presently  used i n  British  Columbia,  The r e a s o n i s t h a t s e c t i o n 717  (3)  the  than  the  development  o f the Municipal A c t  s t a t e s t h a t t h e development p e r m i t can o n l y be u s e d when c o u n c i l believes or  in  well,  special conditions p r e v a i l  design or  siting  s e c t i o n 717  (4)  of  i n the  considerations of the A c t ,  states  p h y s i c a l environment an a p p l i c a t i o n . that  the  As  development  p e r m i t s h a l l n o t v a r y t h e p e r m i t t e d uses o r d e n s i t i e s .  84  The c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g t e c h n i q u e would be a p p l i c a b l e t o land w i t h i n Rural Bylaw,  for  it  District  deems  all  I  and II  parcels  of  as  the  Rural  all  Maintenance  "special".  While  the  development p e r m i t can not v a r y a p e r m i t t e d u s e , t h i s  is  what  expressed  the  conditional  zoning  is  meant  to  do.  Its  exactly  purpose i s t o be used as a d e v i c e which w i l l h e l p f i n d a way t o a l l o w even t h e most u n d e s i r a b l e uses on a p r o p e r t y . it  c a n be c o n s i d e r e d a s b e i n g b o t h f l e x i b l e  In t h i s way  and a p o s i t i v e  land  use c o n t r o l t e c h n i q u e . U n l i k e the densities.  development p e r m i t ,  As w i l l be  explained  w i t h i n the Rural D i s t r i c t  II  acreages t h a t  exist  later  in  this  zoning d i s t r i c t ,  h i g h irdjiimum s i t e a r e a requirement large  c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g can v a r y section,  lands  w i l l have a  very  i n order t o c o i n c i d e with the  i n the d i s t r i c t  at  the  present  time.  The c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g t e c h n i q u e w i l l p r o v i d e t h e o n l y method f o r property  owners t o  subdivide t h e i r  4.4.3  reduce t h e  minimum p a r c e l  size  in  order  to  property.  The S t a n d a r d s The  Standards  which  will  be  included  Maintenance Bylaw a r e d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s s e c t i o n . in typical Sizes,  zoning bylaws,  in  the  Rural  The s t a n d a r d s ,  i n c l u d e s s e c t i o n s such as Minimum L o t  Minimum L o t Widths and Minimum F l o o r A r e a s t o name a few.  Discussion  here  will  focus  on  justifying  the  inclusion  or  e x c l u s i o n o f c e r t a i n s t a n d a r d s from t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw. A d e c i s i o n on whether  a s p e c i f i c s t a n d a r d w i l l be  included  o r e x c l u d e d from t h e bylaw w i l l a r i s e o u t o f t h e a n a l y s i s which took p l a c e i n c h a p t e r two.  The a n a l y s i s o f  A c t s and R e g u l a t i o n s which a f f e c t  existing Provincial  t h e use o f l a n d a l o n g w i t h t h e  85  analysis of a standard  zoning  bylaw, provide  the basis for  deciding what standards are needed and which are not, i n a rural area. As alluded to i n the analysis of statements i n chapter two, many of the standards i n a standard zoning bylaw are also found in a number of provincial Acts and Regulations.  Table 2 l i s t s  the standards which are found i n a typical zoning bylaw.  I t also  indicates whether these standards or sirnilar ones found i n a Provincial land use.  As this table provides  quick and easy  reference to the relationship between the standards and Acts, i t w i l l be referred to frequently. While the table may give the appearance that there i s duplication of standards, this i s not necessarily true.  I t was  found that local zoning bylaws can be more or less stringent than a  similar provincial regulation.  explained  by  the fact  that  This  the local  difference bylaw  consideration the needs and desires of the local  can be  takes  into  population,  whereas, provincial regulations are established to control only the most pressing situations i n the province. The standards w i l l now be commented upon. a.  Minimum Site Area and Minimum Site Width  Table 2 shows that the ndnimum site areas and minimum site widths of lots are governed i n rural areas by two provincial Acts. 20  The Agricultural Land Commission Act can, through section  (1), impose the terms that i t considers advisable.  This  regulation, however, only applies to lands which are within the Agricultural Land Reserve.  The Local Services Act i s the other  86  provincial As  r e g u l a t i o n which c o n t r o l s  described i n  sections  6.01,  chapter 6.02  two,  the  and 6.03  site  area  regulations  closely mirror  and s i t e  width.  contained  within  those  found i n  a  f r i n g e area d i s t r i c t i n a standard zoning bylaw. It  i s p r o p o s e d t h a t t h i s s t a n d a r d be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o  Rural  Maintenance  requirements  Bylaw.  However,  the  c a n be v a r i e d depending on t h e  actual lot  the  minimum  s i z e s which are  d e s i r e d b y t h e a r e a r e s i d e n t s i n each d i s t r i c t . The sample bylaw w h i c h h a s been d e s i g n e d f o r E l e c t o r a l A r e a 'G',  shows  that  the  rural  minimum s i t e w i d t h a r e Act.  the  District  I  minimum  site  area  and  same as found i n t h e L o c a l S e r v i c e s  Whereas, R u r a l d i s t r i c t  II  minimum s i t e a r e a h a s been s e t  a t 50 a c r e s , as d e s i r e d b y t h e r a n c h e r s i n t h a t a r e a . F l e x i b i l i t y has been b u i l t the  conditional  zoning process  i n t o t h e bylaw b y as  a  method  of  incorporating altering  the  irdnimum s i t e a r e a and w i d t h which a r e r e q u i r e d i n R u r a l D i s t r i c t II  only.  or  site  Any d e v e l o p e r w i s h i n g t o width  for  his  property  reduce t h e minimum s i t e  would have  to  enter  area  into  the  c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g p r o c e s s t o do s o . Sections 4  (c)  and  (d)  of  t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw  are  h o u s e k e e p i n g measures t o c o v e r l o t s c r e a t e d p r i o r t o t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h e bylaw and A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission a p p r o v a l s . b.  B u i l d i n g s per L o t  The r e g u l a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e number o f b u i l d i n g s a l l o w e d on a s i n g l e p a r c e l o f l a n d i s governed b y one p r o v i n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n . Table  2  shows t h a t  when t h e r e  is  no z o n i n g  in  an a r e a ,  the  A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission A c t i s t h e o n l y r e g u l a t i o n which can restrict  t h e number o f d w e l l i n g s p e r p a r c e l .  S e c t i o n 16  (a)  of  87  Table 2  YARDS & SETBACKS  MOTOR VEHICLE ACT  B. C. BUILDING CODE  X  ELECTRICAL SAFETY ACT  BUILDINGS PER LOT  FIRE SERVICES ACT  X  HIGHWAY ACT  X  HEALTH ACT  LOCAL SERVICES ACT  MIN. SITE AREA  LAND TITLE ACT  AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION ACT  PROVINCIAL ACTS  X  HEIGHT LIMITATIONS MIN. FLOOR AREA  X  SIGNS  X  LIVESTOCK  X  FLOODPLAIN REGS.  X  PARKING  X  FENCING  X  WRECKED CARS  X  SITE COVERAGE  X  X  X  88 the A c t p r o h i b i t s a m u n i c i p a l i t y or Regional d i s t r i c t permitting or  as  Thus,  a b u i l d i n g on a g r i c u l t u r a l  permitted  by  Agricultural  land,  except  from  for  farm use  Land Ccmrnission r e g u l a t i o n s .  second d w e l l i n g s must be approved b y t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land  commission.  Of c o u r s e , t h e s e r e g u l a t i o n s  only pertain  t h a t f a l l w i t h i n t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land R e s e r v e . unzoned and a r e  o u t s i d e the  to  lands  Lands which a r e  land reserve are not  restricted  in  t h e numbers o f d w e l l i n g s which c a n be c o n s t r u c t e d on a p a r c e l . This  writers  experience  in  dealing  with  more  than  one  r e s i d e n c e on a p a r c e l has shown t h a t second d w e l l i n g s a r e u s u a l l y constructed  to  constructing  additional  usually  hinders  house  the  relatives. dwellings  sale  of  the  Due on  a  to  the  single  property,  fact  parcel  most  to protect  the  rural  character of  of  land  residents  q u i t e p r u d e n t about d e c i d i n g t o b u i l d more t h a n o n e . i n order  that  are  Regardless,  the a r e a ,  the  Rural  Maintenance Bylaw w i l l a l l o w f o r two d w e l l i n g s t o be c o n s t r u c t e d on one p a r c e l p r o v i d e d t h a t t h e area. II.  This regulation w i l l  property  is  o v e r two a c r e s  apply to both Rural D i s t r i c t  I  in and  P a r c e l s w i t h i n t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land R e s e r v e , o f c o u r s e , a r e  o n l y a l l o w e d one house p e r p a r c e l e x c e p t t h a t where p e r m i t t e d  by  t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Ctornmission. c . Y a r d s and Setbacks Table  2 notes t h e r e  these standards. "placing  of  i s one p r o v i n c i a l A c t which  S e c t i o n 4.01  regulates  o f t h e Highway A c t p r o h i b i t s  a building within a distance  of  fifteen  (15)  the feet  from t h e p r o p e r t y l i n e f r o n t i n g on any highway i n an u n o r g a n i z e d territory  except  that  where  a  public  lane  or  alley  provides  secondary a c c e s s t o t h e p r o p e r t y t h e d i s t a n c e i s reduced t o  ten  89 (10)  feet".  which  are  While i t already  i s not t h e i n t e n t i o n t o i n c r e a s e s t a n d a r d s  established,  it  is  felt  that  in  t h e name  " f u t u r e p l a n n i n g " , t h e Highway A c t requirements a r e n o t enough.  In  many c a s e s ,  rural  roads are  o n l y 50  stringent  f e e t wide  and  w i t h a 15 f o o t setback from t h e d w e l l i n g t o t h e p r o p e r t y l i n e , can  hardly  provide  hampering t h e both  Rural  highway  is  enough  usefulness of  District  I  proposed.  and  room  for  future  the d w e l l i n g . II  a  As w e l l ,  setback for  of  the  widening  For t h i s 25  neighbor" setback o f  reason,  feet  10 f e e t on t h e s i d e l o t  there  it  without  from  convenience o f  s u b d i v i s i o n and p o s s i b l y i n c r e a s e d d e n s i t i e s ,  of  in any  future  is a  "good  lines for  dwelling  the s i t e  coverage  units. d.  S i t e Coverage  There  i s one p r o v i n c i a l A c t which l i m i t s  on a p a r c e l o f l a n d . site  coverage,  but  T a b l e 2 shows t h a t t h e H e a l t h A c t can l i m i t it  does s o i n a round about way.  What  this  means i s t h a t t h e a r e a consumed by b u i l d i n g s can b e l i m i t e d o n l y by  the  amount  of  ground n e c e s s a r y f o r  an  adequate  f i e l d when t h e r e i s no community sewer i n t h e Realistically, generally this  large,  it  when d e a l i n g w i t h r u r a l i s f e l t that there  area.  a r e a s where l o t s  i s no need t o  s t a n d a r d i n t o t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw.  shown t h a t most problems c o n c e r n i n g s i t e urban a r e a s where l o t s a r e e.  Height  Table  2  absorption  are  incorporate  E x p e r i e n c e has  coverage t a k e p l a c e  in  smaller.  Limitations indicates  that  there  r e g u l a t i n g the height o f s t r u c t u r e s . d e s i g n e d t o ensure adequate l i g h t  are  no  provincial  The r e g u l a t i o n i s  access t o adjacent  Acts  primarily  properties.  90  This  is  felt  t o be more o f a c o n c e r n i n urban a r e a s where  are smaller.  F o r t h i s r e a s o n , no h e i g h t l i m i t a t i o n s  lots  are included  i n t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw. f.  Minimum F l o o r /Area  The B r i t i s h Columbia B u i l d i n g Code, which i s t h e same as t h e National  Building  Code,  is  shown  on  Table  p r o v i n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n which c o n t r o l s t h i s  2  as  standard.  the  only  W h i l e many  z o n i n g bylaws e s t a b l i s h minimum f l o o r a r e a s f o r d w e l l i n g s ,  it  is  f e l t t h a t t h e requirements l e g i s l a t e d under t h e B u i l d i n g Code a r e adequate.  In urban a r e a s where houses a r e more c l o s e l y s i t u a t e d ,  t h e r e may be a need f o r d w e l l i n g s t o be o f s i m i l a r adjacent  l a r g e house would n o t be d e v a l u e d .  s i z e t h a t an  However,  in  rural  a r e a s where t h e r e a r e l a r g e l o t s , t h i s i s not f e l t t o be o f major concern.  T h e r e f o r e , t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw does n o t  r e g u l a t i o n s g o v e r n i n g t h e minimum f l o o r In  areas  b u i l d i n g bylaw  such  as E l e c t o r a l  and t h u s ,  Area  no b u i l d i n g  contain  area. ' G ' , where  inspection,  there it  is  is  no  left  to  t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o comply w i t h t h e N a t i o n a l B u i l d i n g Code. g. Signs The r e g u l a t i o n o f s i g n s f a l l s under t h e P r o v i n c i a l Motor V e h i c l e A c t . Act,  S e c t i o n 213  jurisdiction of (4)  and ( 5 ) ,  of  " p r o h i b i t s t h e e r e c t i o n o f any s i g n w i t h i n 300 metres  the the from  t h e boundary l i n e o f a highway i n t h e r u r a l a r e a s o f t h e p r o v i n c e without  the  written  consent  of  the  Minister  of  Highways  and  Transportation or a person authorized by him". Some R e g i o n a l  Districts  the standards s e c t i o n o f t h e i r  incorporate  sign regulations  zoning bylaws.  into  F o r t h e purposes  o f t h e r u r a l Maintenance Bylaw, r e g u l a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g s i g n s w i l l  91  not  be  included.  The  reason i s  that,  most  signs that  t y p i c a l l y be found i n a r u r a l a r e a a r e a l l o w e d . foreseen  with  commercial  signs,  however,  a  would  Problems can be developer  would  n o r m a l l y be a p p r i s e d o f t h e p r o v i n c i a l s i g n r e g u l a t i o n s when he a p p l i e s f o r an a c c e s s p e r m i t f o r a b u s i n e s s u s e . minimize agency  confusion,  regulate  it  is  better  signs  so  that  that  I n an e f f o r t  a provincial  continuity  can be  to  government maintained  throughout t h e p r o v i n c e . h.  livestock  To p r o t e c t the  adjacent property  owners from obnoxious s m e l l s ,  R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw p r o p o s e s t h a t s h e l t e r and cages f o r  livestock  be  setback  from  the  property  twenty-five f e e t i n both Rural d i s t r i c t require  that a l l  lines  I  a  and II.  distance It  of  w i l l also  l i v e s t o c k be p r o p e r l y caged and h o u s e d .  This  would o n l y seem f a i r t o a d j a c e n t p r o p e r t y owners. i. As  Parking noted  in  Table  2,  parking  under t h e L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t . possible  to  ac(X>mmodate  proposed s u b d i v i s i o n . is  two  requirements  S e c t i o n 4.15 vehicles  on  are  legislated  requires that i t every  parcel  be  in  a  One weakness o f t h i s r e g u l a t i o n i s t h a t  o n l y a p p l i c a b l e when a p a r c e l i s b e i n g s u b d i v i d e d .  It  it  does  not a f f e c t p a r c e l s t h a t are b e i n g developed without s u b d i v i s i o n . Most z o n i n g bylaws expand on t h e s e parking  requirements  rrulti-family  for  residential  all  uses  regulations to  including  developments.  But,  commercial  even though  regulations e x i s t they are very d i f f i c u l t t o enforce. if  it  will  include  After  and these all,  i s more c o n v e n i e n t t o p a r k on t h e r o a d , t h a t ' s where p e o p l e park.  92  As f o r  t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw,  no p a r k i n g  regulations  a r e p r o p o s e d beyond what a l r e a d y e x i s t i n t h e L o c a l S e r v i c e s A c t . There  are  Bylaw i s  two  reasons  designed t o  for  this,  first,  govern a r u r a l  the  Rural  Maintenance  a r e a where l o t s a r e  larger  and an a c c e s s can u s u a l l y be found on a l l p a r c e l s w h i c h w i l l meet the  L o c a l Services A c t requirements.  Realistically,  p e o p l e would e v e r b u i l d a s t r u c t u r e a c c e s s o f f a roadway.  Secondly, i f  use  for,  is  ever  applied  it  on a  few  l a r g e l o t w i t h o u t any  a commercial o r  would  only a  have  to  be  multi-family approved  by  c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g which would t a k e t h e p a r k i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s  into  consideration. j.  Fencing  Table 2 notes t h a t provincial Acts.  f e n c i n g r e g u l a t i o n s can be found i n  two  The A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission c a n impose  fencing r e s t r i c t i o n s  in their  approvals.  S e c t i o n 15  (2)  of  the  A c t a u t h o r i z e s t h e Land Commission t o impose terms on t h e use o f t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d when i t course,  this  only applies  to  i s not b e i n g used f o r farm u s e . lands which are  governed b y  Of the  A g r i c u t u r a l Land Commission A c t . The o t h e r in  the  4.03,  provincial regulation  Highway A c t . of  horizontal  the  Act,  As noted prohibits  dimension  i n a previous chapter,  the  exceeding  g o v e r n i n g f e n c i n g i s found  placing of  two  (2)  feet  a  fence  within  t r i a n g l e above an e l e v a t i o n such t h a t an eye t h r e e  (3)  section "within  the  f e e t above  t h e s u r f a c e e l e v a t i o n o f one highway cannot see an o b j e c t (3)  site  f e e t above t h e s u r f a c e e l e v a t i o n o f t h e o t h e r highway".  three The  f o l l o w i n g diagram taken from t h e Highway A c t i l l u s t r a t e s what i s meant b y t h e above r e g u l a t i o n .  93  ROAD  LOT  Often,  zoning bylaws expand upon these regulations by  the height of a fence t o 6 feet o v e r a l l and  limiting  4 feet along  the  front yard l i n e and back to 25 foot along the side l o t l i n e s . The  Rural Maintenance Bylaw does not proposes any  restrictions.  In r u r a l areas,  fencing  where large l o t s are the norm,  there i s no need t o impose further r e s t r i c t i o n s above and beyond what already e x i s t i n the Highway Act. k.  Floodplain  Table  2  Regulations  indicates  that  flcodplain  regulations  p r o v i n c i a l l y l e g i s l a t e d i n the Local Services Act and T i t l e Act.  I t also notes that these regulations may  are  the Land only  be  imposed at the time of subdivision. As alluded t o i n the analysis of the planners statement about development on hazard lands, the Ministry o f Environment can impose f l o o d p l a i n regulations i n the form o f a r e s t r i c t i v e covenant on  lands being  subdivided.  In  areas where there i s no zoning, and development i s taking place without subdivision, structures may  be b u i l t without regard  to  any f l o o d p l a i n regulations. Most regulations  zoning so  bylaws  include  that a l l new  floodplain requirements.  a  section  structures,  on  floodplain  must conform to  the  An example of such regulations i s found  94  i n Appendix D, the  the  G e n e r a l Requirements  f l o o d p l a i n r e g u l a t i o n s found i n a l l  S e c t i o n , which  include  the Regional D i s t r i c t  of  Okanagan-Similkameen E l e c t o r a l A r e a Z o n i n g B y l a w s . As  it  is  f e l t that  f l o o p l a i n regulations  p a r t i n t h e promotion o f a s a f e environment,  p l a y an  it  integral  i s proposed t h a t  t h e y be i n c l u d e d i n t h e R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw.  The  floodplain  r e g u l a t i o n s i n t h e Sample R u r a l Maintenance Bylaw a r e t h e same as those  found  in  all  Regional  District  of  Okanagan-Similkameen  Zoning Bylaws. 1.  Wrecked C a r s  The  only  provincial  regulation  to  control  the  storing  of  wrecked c a r s i s t h e B r i t i s h Columbia A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Commission Act.  Section  15  (2)  of  the  Act,  c o n t r o l t h e use o f a g r i c u l t u r a l Z o n i n g bylaws o f t e n  empowers  the  Commission t o  lands. s e c t i o n s governing the  use o f  land f o r the wrecking or s t o r i n g o f d e r e l i c t automobiles.  These  regulations adjacent  are  include  incorporated  property  i n t o the  z o n i n g bylaws  owners from h a v i n g t o  live  to  next t o  protect  an unsafe  and u n s i g h t l y p r e m i s e s . The  Rural  regulations. properties  Maintenance Experience  raise  the  ire  Bylaw proposes t o has of  shown  adjacent  that  implement derelict  property  owners  similar  cars  on  in  both  urban and r u r a l a r e a s .  4.5  METHOD OF PROCESSING CONDITIONAL ZONING  The method o f p r o c e s s i n g t h e c o n d i t i o n a l z o n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n w i l l  not  v a r y s i g n i f i c a n t l y from t h a t used f o r p r o c e s s i n g t h e development p e r m i t o r standard rezoning.  95  The a p p l i c a t i o n form w i l l r e q u i r e written  description of  Applications would have  to to  t h a t the  developer provide both a  t h e proposed development a l o n g w i t h a  amend t h e include  ixunimum l o t  a site  s i z e w i t h i n the  p l a n showing t h e  rural  site  plan.  District  l o c a t i o n o f proposed  II lot  l i n e s as i s n o r m a l l y r e q u i r e d f o r a s u b d i v i s i o n a p p l i c a t i o n . The a p p l i c a t i o n would t h e n be p r o c e s s e d b y R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t s t a f f forwarded i n bylaw form t o t h e R e g i o n a l Board f o r Board  feels  the  feasibility,  p r o p o s a l has  they  distributed to  will  give  merit it  or  first  is  first  interested  reading.  reading.  in  and  If  the  detenrdning  The bylaw  will  its  then  o t h e r government a g e n c i e s who may have an i n t e r e s t .  be  By t h e  t i m e t h e n e x t b o a r d meeting t a k e s p l a c e , t h e government a g e n c i e s w i l l have responded.  If  the  p r o p o s e d use  is  totally  opposed b y  the  government  a g e n c i e s , t h e R e g i o n a l Board may d e c i d e t o deny t h e r e z o n i n g a t t h i s If  the  comments a r e  somewhat  obtaining public input,  bylaw,  that  and t h e  It  public participation  including details  appropriate  o f the  becomes a k e y  newspapers i n  the  location  of  t h e manner  the  factor.  Copies of  development, would be m a i l e d t o  M u n i c i p a l A c t i n c l u d i n g a map s o t h a t a l l understand  interested  in  i s a t t h i s p o i n t i n the c o n d i t i o n a l zoning  p r o p e r t y owners and o t h e r i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s . the  Board i s  t h e y w i l l g i v e t h e bylaw second r e a d i n g and s e t a  date f o r a p u b l i c h e a r i n g . process  favorable  point.  the  adjacent  N o t i c e s would be p l a c e d i n  r e q u i r e d b y s e c t i o n 720  of  interested parties w i l l  clearly  proposed rezoning.  c u r r e n t l y not r e q u i r e d b y t h e M u n i c i p a l A c t .  It  This  procedure  the  is  i s f e l t t h a t i f maps were  r e q u i r e d , more p e o p l e would understand t h e whereabouts o f t h e p r o p e r t y and respond  accordingly.  The  elected  director  for  the  area  in  which  the  p r o p o s a l i s l o c a t e d would ask h i s A d v i s o r y P l a n n i n g Commission f o r comments and recommendations.  In  all  it  i s hoped t h a t a l l  be informed o f t h e p r o p o s a l s o t h a t t h e i r  interested parties  i n p u t c a n be o b t a i n e d .  will  96  The p u b l i c h e a r i n g would f o c u s on two main i s s u e s . to  determine  the  public  acceptance  of  the  The f i r s t would be  proposal.  Secondly,  any  o b j e c t i o n s would be c l a s s i f i e d i n t o two t y p e s ; a) t h o s e w h i c h c o u l d be r e s o l v e d b y b u f f e r s , s e t b a c k s and the l i k e , o r b) those which conditions. If  cannot  be  resolved  applying  through  conditions  the  such  implementation  as  of  most o f t h e o p p o s i t i o n c o u l d n o t be r e s o l v e d b y s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s  and were v o i c e d b y a d j a c e n t p r o p e r t y be d e n i e d .  If,  however,  most o f  owners,  the  t h e n t h e bylaw would p r o b a b l y  o b j e c t i o n s were o f  the  type  which  c o u l d be r e s o l v e d b y s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s , t h e n t h e p l a n n e r would n e g o t i a t e solution.  It  comes  play.  into  i s at  t h i s p o i n t that the c o n d i t i o n a l zoning technique For  the  bylaw,  as n e g o t i a t e d  by the  truly  planner with  c o n c e r n e d , would be p r e s e n t e d t o t h e R e g i o n a l Board f o r t h i r d r e a d i n g . developer final  would  t h e n have  to  agree  to  the  development  a  package p r i o r  all The to  adoption. It  is  felt  that  the  p r o c e s s would  proceed  smoothly  because  the  d e v e l o p e r would be i n v o l v e d i n t h e n e g o t i a t i o n p r o c e s s from t h e s t a r t .  In  t h i s way, he would be aware o f the s p e c i a l c o n d i t i o n s and t h e reasons  for  them. While  it  is  important  role  province,  it  contact a f t e r of  the  final  felt  in  that  the  Ministry  providing continuity  i s not neccessary f o r first bylaw  reading.  of  Municipal  Affairs  plays  on z o n i n g m a t t e r s throughout  them t o be i n v o l v e d beyond t h e  Therefore,  an the  initial  t h e y would s i m p l y be s e n t a copy  so t h a t they are kept abreast  of  the  rezoning  taking  p l a c e throughout t h e p r o v i n c e .  4.6  POLICING THE ATLERNATIVE The  policing  of  a  conditional  rezoning  of  a  prohibited  use  is  97  essential flexible  for  the  Rural  Maintenance  l a n d use c o n t r o l .  inspection,  Bylaw t o  Therefore,  succeed as  a positive  and  i n a r e a s where t h e r e i s no b u i l d i n g  such as i n E l e c t o r a l A r e a  'G', it  would be n e c e s s a r y t h a t  the  c o n s t r u c t i o n o f s t r u c t u r e s on p a r c e l s which have been c o n d i t i n a l l y rezoned or  are  in  inspector.  a  floodplain,  be  policed  by  a  Regional  District  building  T h i s would ensure t h a t a l l a s p e c t s o f t h e c o n d i t i o n a l r e z o n i n g  a r e adhered t o . Construction of prohibited  uses o r  structures of are  not  in  l a n d uses which a r e n o t on t h e l i s t  f l o o d p l a i n a r e a s would n o t  p o l i c i n g by the b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t o r .  be  subject  of to  U n l e s s , o f course, the area residents  wanted b u i l d i n g i n s p e c t i o n and adopted a b u i l d i n g bylaw.  4.7  THE UNCERTAINITY CREATED BY THE ALTERNATIVE W h i l e a l i s t o f p r o h i b i t e d uses i s f e l t t o be more a p p l i c a b l e t o  areas than  a l i s t o f permitted uses,  question.  A list  no  will  others  o f permitted  be  allowed.  this  list  F o r example,  l e g a l c e r t a i n t y c a n be c a l l e d  into  uses e n s u r e s t h e p u b l i c t h a t t h o s e uses and While  p r o v i d e t h e same k i n d o f c e r t a i n t y , certainty.  its  rural  a it  list  of  prohibited  u s e s does  not  does p r o v i d e a s u f f i c i e n t degree o f  t h e p u b l i c w i l l know t h a t t h e u n d e s i r a b l e uses on  w i l l o n l y be a l l o w e d  if  c o n d i t i o n s , which t h e y h e l p e s t a b l i s h ,  a r e agreed t o b y t h e d e v e l o p e r s . 4.8  REVIEW OF THE ALTERNATIVE The a l t e r n a t i v e  s h o u l d be reviewed p e r i o d i c a l l y w i t h a view  i n c r e a s i n g l a n d use r e g u l a t i o n s i f Rather years,  it  than  reviewing  development p r e s s u r e s w a r r a n t  on s p e c i f i c t i m e  periods  such as  towards  it. every  five  would seem s e n s i b l e t o s i m p l y h a v e t h e r e g i o n a l p l a n n e r s monitor  t h e growth o f development and i n i t i a t e changes when n e c e s s a r y .  98  4.9 SAMPLE RURAL MAINTENANCE BYLAW RURAL DISTRICT (1)  I  PURPOSE: T o p r o v i d e development c o n t r o l r e g u l a t i o n s which ensure t h e h e a l t h y and c o n v e n i e n t development o f E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' .  (2)  safe,  PROHIBITED USES; The f o l l o w i n g u s e s Conditional zoning.  are  prohibited  unless  specifically  approved  by  (a) Amusement Parks (b) Dude Ranches (c) Horse and A u t o R a c i n g C i r c u i t s (d) R i d i n g Academies (e) Commercial K e n n e l s (f) Mink Farms (g) F e e d l o t s (h) P i g g e r i e s o r o t h e r n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l , p r o d u c t - b a s e d o p e r a t i o n s (i) M u l t i - f a m i l y Dwellings (j) M o b i l e Home Parks (k) M o t e l s (1) H o t e l s (m) R e s o r t s (n) Campsites (o) S e r v i c e S t a t i o n s (p) R e s t a u r a n t s (q) R e t a i l S t o r e s (r) Commercial o r P r o f e s s i o n a l B u s i n e s s O f f i c e s (s) Museums (t) I n d u s t r i e s w i t h o v e r 10,000 square f e e t o f f l o o r a r e a (u) I n d u s t r i e s w h i c h a r e obnoxious b y r e a s o n o f smoke, fumes, d u s t , v i b r a t i o n , n o i s e o r odour (v Automobile Wrecking and S t o r a g e Yards (w I n d u s t r i a l u s e s on p a r c e l s o v e r 2 a c r e s i n a r e a (3)  STANDARDS E v e r y use o f l a n d and e v e r y b u i l d i n g o r s t r u c t u r e i n t h e E l e c t o r a l A r e a s h a l l comply w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f S u b s e c t i o n s (4) to (9) inclusive.  (4)  MINIMUM SITE AREA AND MINIMUM SITE WIDTH: (a) Where b o t h an approved community o r m u n i c i p a l water system and a m u n i c i p a l sewage c o l l e c t i o n system a r e p r o v i d e d , t h e muiiJBjm s i t e a r e a s h a l l be Seven Thousand and F i v e Hundred (7,500) square f e e t and t h e irdnimum s i t e w i d t h s h a l l be F i f t y (50) f e e t ;  99  (b) Where an approved community o r m u n i c i p a l w a t e r system i s p r o v i d e d , b u t a m u n i c i p a l sewage c o l l e c t i o n system c o l l e c t i o n system i s n o t p r o v i d e d , t h e minimum s i t e a r e a s h a l l b e Nine Thousand (9,000) square f e e t and t h e minimum s i t e w i d t h s h a l l b e Seventy (70) f e e t ; (c) Where n e i t h e r a n approved p u b l i c water system n o r a community o r m u n i c i p a l sewage c o l l e c t i o n system i s p r o v i d e d , t h e minimum s i t e a r e a s h a l l b e E i g h t e e n Thousand (18,000) square f e e t and t h e mLnimum s i t e w i d t h s h a l l b e Seventy (70) f e e t . (d) L o t s c r e a t e d p r i o r t o t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h i s Bylaw, r e g a r d l e s s o f a r e a o r d i m e n s i o n s , may b e used p r o v i d e d t h e method b y w h i c h sewage i s disposed o f i s s a t i s f a c t o r y t o the Medical Health O f f i c e r . (e) N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e above, where p e r m i s s i o n f o r a HOMESITE SERVERENCE h a s been g r a n t e d b y t h e B r i t i s h Columbia A g r i c u l t u r a l l a n d Commission, t h e a r e a and dimensions o f such HOMESITE s h a l l be as p e r m i t t e d b y t h e Ccmmission. BUILDINGS PER LOT: (a) A nHximum o f two (2) d w e l l i n g u n i t s on each p a r c e l o v e r two (2) acres i n area. YARDS, SETBACKS: (a) On any l o t o r s i t e , d w e l l i n g u n i t s s h a l l be t w e n t y - f i v e (25) f e e t from t h e f r o n t y a r d l i n e and t e n (10) f e e t from any s i d e l o t l i n e . (b) A l l b u i l d i n g s h o u s i n g l i v e s t o c k s h a l l be s e t b a c k t w e n t y - f i v e f e e t from any p r o p e r t y l i n e .  (25)  LIVESTOCK: (a) A l l l i v e s t o c k o t h e r t h a n h o u s e h o l d p e t s s h a l l b e p r o p e r l y caged and h o u s e d . WRECKED CARS: (a) No p a r c e l s h a l l be used f o r t h e w r e c k i n g o r s t o r a g e o f automobiles o r a s a junk y a r d .  derelict  FLOOD CONTROLS: (a) N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any o t h e r p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s Bylaw, o n f l o a d a b l e l a n d no b u i l d i n g o r any p a r t thereof s h a l l be c o n s t r u c t e d , reconstructed, moved o r extended n o r s h a l l any m o b i l e home o r u n i t , modular home o r s t r u c t u r e b e l o c a t e d ; (i) w i t h i n seven p o i n t f i v e o f a l a k e , swamp o r pond;  (7.5) metres o f t h e n a t u r a l boundary  within thiry (30) metres o f Similkameen o r Tulameen R i v e r s ;  the natural  boundary o f  the  100  w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) metres o f t h e d e s i g n water l e v e l boundary o f t h e Okanagan R i v e r c h a n n e l ; w i t h i n f i f t e e n (15) metres o t h e r nearby w a t e r c o u r s e ;  o f the  n a t u r a l boundary o f  any  (ii) w i t h t h e u n d e r s i d e o f t h e f l o o r system o f any a r e a used f o r habitation, business, or storage of goods damageable by f l o o d w a t e r s , o r i n t h e c a s e o f a m o b i l e home o r u n i t t h e ground l e v e l on which i t i s l o c a t e d : lower t h a n z e r o p o i n t s i x (0.6) metres above t h e 200 y e a r f l o o d l e v e l where i t have been determined b y , o r t o t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n o f , the M i n i s t r y of Environment; nor lower t h a n t h r e e (3) metres above t h e n a t u r a l o f t h e Similkameen o r Tulameen R i v e r s ;  boundary  nor lower t h a n one p o i n t f i v e (1.5) metres above t h e d e s i g n water s u r f a c e p r o f i l e o f t h e Okanagan R i v e r c h a n n e l ; nor lower t h a n one p o i n t f i v e (1.5) metres above t h e n a t u r a l boundary o f any o t h e r w a t e r c o u r s e , l a k e , swamp o r pond, w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f Okanagan, Osoyoos, Skaha, Tug u l N u i t and Vaseux L a k e s , where t h e minimum e l e v a t i o n a t w h i c h a b u i l d i n g may be c o n s t r u c t e d o r mobile u n i t l o c a t e d s h a l l b e :  Okanagan Lake Osoyoos Lake Skaha Lake Tug u l N u i t Lake Vaseux Lake  (b) C l a u s e (a)  (ii)  343. 66 280. 70 339. 24 299. 50 329. 49  metres metres metres metres metres  G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C.  datum datum datum datum datum  s h a l l not a p p l y t o :  (i) a r e n o v a t i o n o f an e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g o r s t r u c t u r e used as a r e s i d e n c e t h a t does not i n v o l v e an a d d i t i o n t h e r e t o : (ii) that portion of a building or carport o r garage;  structure  to  be used as a  (iii) farm b u i l d i n g s o t h e r t h a n d w e l l i n g u n i t s and c l o s e d - s i d e d livestock housing. Farm d w e l l i n g u n i t s on p a r c e l s i z e s 8.1 h e c t a r e s o r g r e a t e r and w i t h i n t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserve a r e exempted from t h e requirements o f C l a u s e (b) ( i i ) but i f i n a f l o o d a b l e a r e a s h a l l be e l e v a t e d one (1) metre above t h e n a t u r a l ground e l e v a t i o n . C l o s e d - s i d e d l i v e s t o c k h o u s i n g b e h i n d 1 i n 200 y e a r s t a n d a r d dykes as approved b y t h e M i n i s t r y o f Environment i s exempted from t h e requirement t o f l o o d p r o o f b u t i f not b e h i n d 200 y e a r s t a n d a r d dykes s h a l l a l s o be e l e v a t e d on (1) metre above t h e n a t u r a l ground e l e v a t i o n ; (iv) l i g h t o r heavy i n d u s t r i a l development w h i c h i s r e q u i r e d t o f l o o d p r o o f t o an e l e v a t i o n z e r o p o i n t s i x (0.6) metres l e s s than  101  the F l o o d Construction L e v e l Environment ;  a s determined b y t h e M i n i s t r y o f  (v) heavy i n d u s t r y b e h i n d 1 i n 200 y e a r s t a n d a r d dykes as approved b y t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t . Heavy i n d u s t r y i n c l u d e s such u s e s a s manufacturing o r p r o c e s s i n g o f wood and paper p r o d u c t s , m e t a l , heavy e l e c t r i c a l , n o n - m e t a l i c m i n e r a l p r o d u c t s , p e t r o l e u m and c o a l p r o d u c t s , i n d u s t r i a l c h e m i c a l s and b y - p r o d u c t s and a l l i e d p r o d u c t s ; (vi) t h e r e q u i r e d e l e v a t i o n may be a c h i e v e d b y s t r u c t u r a l elevation o f the s a i d h a b i t a b l e , business, o r storage area or by a d e q u a t e l y compacted l a n d f i l l on which any b u i l d i n g i s t o be cons t r e t ed o r m o b i l e home l o c a t e d , o r b y a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b o t h s t r u c t u r a l e l e v a t i o n and l a n d f i l l . Where l a n d f i l l i s used t o a c h i e v e t h e r e q u i r e d e l e v a t i o n s s t a t e d i n C l a u s e ( b ) ( i i ) above, no p o r t i o n o f t h e l a n d f i l l s l o p e s h a l l be c l o s e r t h a n t h e d i s t a n c e s i n C l a u s e ( b ) ( i ) from t h e n a t u r a l boundary, and t h e f a c e o f t h e l a n d f i l l s l o p e s h a l l be a d e q u a t e l y p r o t e c t e d a g a i n s t e r o s i o n from f l o o d w a t e r s . P r o v i d e d t h a t , w i t h t h e a p p r o v a l o f t h e Deputy M i n i s t e r o f Environment, o r h i s d e s i g n a t e t o ensure t h a t adequate p r o t e c t i o n from f l o o d o r e r o s i o n h a z a r d i s p r o v i d e d , t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s may be r e d u c e d .  102 RURAL DISTRICT (1)  II  PURPOSE: T o p r o v i d e development c o n t r o l r e g u l a t i o n s which ensure the h e a l t h y and c o n v e n i e n t development o f E l e c t o r a l A r e a ' G ' .  (2)  safe,  PROHIBITED USES; The f o l l o w i n g u s e s Conditional zoning.  are  prohibited  unless  specifically  approved  by  Amusement Parks Dude Ranches Horse and A u t o R a c i n g C i r c u i t s R i d i n g Academies Commercial K e n n e l s Mink Farms Feedlots Piggeries or other n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l , product-based operations M u l t i - f a m i l y Dwellings M o b i l e Home Parks Motels Hotels Resorts Campsites Service Stations Restaurants R e t a i l Stores Commercial o r P r o f e s s i o n a l B u s i n e s s O f f i c e s Museums I n d u s t r i e s w i t h o v e r 10,000 square f e e t o f f l o o r a r e a I n d u s t r i e s w h i c h a r e obnoxious b y r e a s o n o f smoke, fumes, d u s t , v i b r a t i o n , n o i s e o r odour (v Automobile Wrecking and Storage Y a r d s (w I n d u s t r i a l u s e s on p a r c e l s o v e r 2 a c r e s i n a r e a (a (b (c (d (e (f (g (h (i (j (k (1 (m (n (o (P (q (r (s (t (u  (3) STANDARDS E v e r y use o f l a n d and e v e r y b u i l d i n g o r s t r u c t u r e i n t h e E l e c t o r a l A r e a s h a l l comply w i t h the p r o v i s i o n s o f S u b s e c t i o n s (4) t o (9) inclusive. (4)  MINIMUM SITE AREA AND MINIMUM SITE WIDTH: (a) U n l e s s r e v i s e d b y a C o n d i t i o n a l Z o n i n g , t h e minimum s i t e a r e a s h a l l be f i f t y (50) a c r e s and t h e minimum s i t e w i d t h s h a l l be one thousand (1,000) f e e t . (b) L o t s c r e a t e d p r i o r t o the a d o p t i o n o f t h i s Bylaw, r e g a r d l e s s o f a r e a o r d i m e n s i o n s , may be used p r o v i d e d t h e method b y w h i c h sewage i s disposed o f i s s a t i s f a c t o r y t o the Medical Health O f f i c e r . (c) Notwithstanding the above, where p e r m i s s i o n f o r a HOMESITE SEVERENCE h a s been g r a n t e d b y t h e B r i t i s h Columbia A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Corrmission, t h e p e r m i t t e d a r e a and dimensions o f such HOMESITE s h a l l be as p e r m i t t e d b y t h e Commission.  103  BUILDINGS PER LOT: (a) (5)  A maximum o f acres i n area.  two  (2)  dwelling  units  on each p a r c e l  over  five  YARDS, SETBACKS: (a) On any l o t o r s i t e , d w e l l i n g u n i t s s h a l l be t w e n t y - f i v e (25) from t h e f r o n t y a r d l i n e and t e n (10) from any s i d e l o t l i n e .  feet  (b) A l l b u i l d i n g s h o u s i n g l i v e s t o c k s h a l l be s e t b a c k t w e n t y - f i v e f e e t from any p r o p e r t y l i n e .  (25)  LIVESTOCK: (a) A l l l i v e s t o c k o t h e r t h a n h o u s e h o l d p e t s s h a l l be p r o p e r l y caged and h o u s e d . WRECKED CARS: (a) No p a r c e l s h a l l be used f o r t h e w r e c k i n g o r s t o r a g e o f automobiles o r as a junk y a r d .  derelict  FLOOD CONTROLS: (a) N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g any o t h e r p r o v i s i o n s o f t h i s Bylaw, on f l o o d a b l e land no b u i l d i n g o r any p a r t t h e r e o f s h a l l be constructed, r e c o n s t r u c t e d , moved o r extended nor s h a l l any m o b i l e home o r u n i t , modular home o r s t r u c t u r e be l o c a t e d ; (i) w i t h i n seven p o i n t f i v e o f a l a k e , swamp o r pond;  (7.5)  metres o f t h e n a t u r a l boundary  within thiry (30) metres o f Similkameen o r Tulameen R i v e r s ;  the  natural  boundary  of  the  w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) metres o f t h e d e s i g n water l e v e l boundary o f t h e Okanagan R i v e r c h a n n e l ; w i t h i n f i f t e e n (15) metres o f o t h e r nearby w a t e r c o u r s e ;  the n a t u r a l  boundary o f  any  (ii) w i t h t h e u n d e r s i d e o f t h e f l o o r system o f any a r e a used f o r habitation, business, or storage of goods damageable by f l o o d w a t e r s , o r i n t h e c a s e o f a mobile home o r u n i t t h e ground l e v e l on w h i c h i t i s l o c a t e d : lower t h a n z e r o p o i n t s i x (0.6) metres above t h e 200 y e a r f l o o d l e v e l where i t have been determined b y , o r t o t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n o f , the M i n i s t r y of Environment; n o r lower t h a n t h r e e (3) metres above t h e n a t u r a l boundary o f t h e Similkameen o r Tulameen R i v e r s ; n o r lower t h a n one p o i n t f i v e (1.5) metres above t h e d e s i g n water s u r f a c e p r o f i l e o f t h e Okanagan R i v e r c h a n n e l ;  104  nor lower than one p o i n t f i v e (1.5) metres above t h e n a t u r a l boundary o f any o t h e r w a t e r c o u r s e , l a k e , swamp o r pond, w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f Okanagan, Osoyoos, Skaha, T u g u l N u i t and Vaseux L a k e s , where t h e irdnimum e l e v a t i o n a t w h i c h a b u i l d i n g may be c o n s t r u c t e d o r mobile u n i t l o c a t e d s h a l l b e :  Okanagan Lake Osoyoos Lake Skaha Lake Tug u l N u i t Lake Vaseux Lake  (b) C l a u s e (a)  (ii)  343. 66 280. 70 339. 24 299. 50 329. 49  metres metres metres metres metres  G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C.  datum datum datum datum datum  s h a l l not apply t o :  (i) a r e n o v a t i o n o f an e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g o r s t r u c t u r e used a s a r e s i d e n c e t h a t does n o t i n v o l v e an a d d i t i o n t h e r e t o : (ii) that portion o f a building or structure carport o r garage;  t o b e used a s a  (iii) farm b u i l d i n g s o t h e r t h a n d w e l l i n g u n i t s and c l o s e d - s i d e d livestock housing. Farm d w e l l i n g u n i t s on p a r c e l s i z e s 8.1 h e c t a r e s o r g r e a t e r and w i t h i n t h e A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserve a r e exempted from t h e requirements o f C l a u s e (b) ( i i ) b u t i f i n a f l o o d a b l e a r e a s h a l l b e e l e v a t e d one (1) metre above t h e n a t u r a l ground e l e v a t i o n . C l o s e d - s i d e d l i v e s t o c k h o u s i n g b e h i n d 1 i n 200 y e a r s t a n d a r d dykes as approved b y t h e M i n i s t r y o f Environment i s exempted from t h e requirement t o f l o o d p r o o f b u t i f n o t b e h i n d 200 y e a r s t a n d a r d dykes s h a l l a l s o b e e l e v a t e d on (1) metre above t h e n a t u r a l ground e l e v a t i o n ; (iv) l i g h t o r heavy i n d u s t r i a l development w h i c h i s r e q u i r e d t o f l o o d p r o o f t o a n e l e v a t i o n z e r o p o i n t s i x ( 0 . 6 ) metres l e s s t h a n t h e F l o o d C o n s t r u c t i o n L e v e l a s determined b y t h e M i n i s t r y o f Environment; (v) heavy i n d u s t r y b e h i n d 1 i n 200 y e a r s t a n d a r d dykes as approved b y t h e M i n i s t r y o f E n v i r o n m e n t . Heavy i n d u s t r y i n c l u d e s such u s e s a s m a n u f a c t u r i n g o r p r o c e s s i n g o f wood and paper p r o d u c t s , m e t a l , heavy e l e c t r i c a l , n o n - m e t a l i c m i n e r a l p r o d u c t s , p e t r o l e u m and c o a l p r o d u c t s , i n d u s t r i a l c h e m i c a l s and b y - p r o d u c t s and a l l i e d p r o d u c t s ; (vi) t h e r e q u i r e d e l e v a t i o n may be a c h i e v e d b y s t r u c t u r a l e l e v a t i o n o f the s a i d h a b i t a b l e , b u s i n e s s , o r storage area o r by a d e q u a t e l y compacted l a n d f i l l o n which any b u i l d i n g i s t o be c o n s t r c t e d o r m o b i l e home l o c a t e d , o r b y a c o m b i n a t i o n o f b o t h s t r u c t u r a l e l e v a t i o n and l a n d f i l l . Where l a n d f i l l i s u s e d t o a c h i e v e t h e r e q u i r e d e l e v a t i o n s s t a t e d i n C l a u s e ( b ) ( i i ) above, no p o r t i o n o f t h e l a n d f i l l s l o p e s h a l l b e c l o s e r than t h e d i s t a n c e s i n C l a u s e ( b ) ( i ) from t h e n a t u r a l boundary, and t h e f a c e o f t h e l a n d f i l l s l o p e s h a l l be a d e q u a t e l y p r o t e c t e d a g a i n s t e r o s i o n from f l o o d w a t e r s .  105  P r o v i d e d t h a t , w i t h t h e a p p r o v a l o f t h e Deputy M i n i s t e r o f Environment, o r h i s d e s i g n a t e t o ensure t h a t adequate p r o t e c t i o n from f l o o d o r e r o s i o n h a z a r d i s p r o v i d e d , t h e s e requirements may be r e d u c e d . 5.0  CONCLUSION T h i s c h a p t e r i s i n t e n d e d t o r e f l e c t on t h i s s t u d y and t h e  it  proposes.  The f i r s t p a r t o u t l i n e s a number o f l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e s t u d y .  The second p a r t d i s c u s s e s t h e  limitations  d i s c u s s e s the v a l i d i t y o f the  alternative.  5.1  o f the a l t e r n a t i v e .  Part  three  LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY One o f t h e p r i m a r y  the  alternatives  "Analysis of  investigation information. study  area  limitations  Statements",  into  each  F o r example, could  have  o f t h e s t u d y i s found i n C h a p t e r two,  where  statement  it  is  may  d e t a i l i n g the  provided  t e c h n i c a l l y p r e c i s e method o f  acknowledged t h a t have  yielded  an  more  indepth  complete  c o s t s o f s e r v i c i n g sprawl i n t h e  actual  dollar  analyzing the  figures.  Or,  a  more  spatial relationships of  the  u n d e s i r a b l e l a n d u s e s i n t h e Okanagan F a l l s a r e a compared t o t h e Keremeos A r e a may have p r o v i d e d more depth t o t h e s t u d y . methods w h i c h were  used,  it  must be  emphasized t h a t  g e n e r a l t r e n d s was a l l t h a t was d e s i r e d . sophisticated statements,  methods  were  utilized  However, i n d e f e n c e o f  If  the  limitation  examination  i s the e x t e n t o f t h e w r i t e r s  the  of  each  of  the  itself.  planning experience.  U s i n g t h e e x p e r i e n c e g a i n e d as a P l a n n i n g T e c h n i c i a n i n D i s t r i c t has l i m i t e d t h e w r i t e r s  into  an i n d e p t h a n a l y s i s u s i n g more  c o u l d h a v e been a major r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t i n  Another  insight  the  j u s t one R e g i o n a l  i n s i g h t s on how z o n i n g i s v i e w e d , used and  abused i n o n l y one a r e a o f t h e p r o v i n c e . h a d e x p e r i e n c e i n b o t h p u b l i c and p r i v a t e  If,  f o r example, t h e w r i t e r h a d  planning p o s i t i o n s ,  i n various  p a r t s o f t h e p r o v i n c e , a more w h o l i s t i c p e r c e p t i o n o f z o n i n g may have been acquired.  T h i s may h a v e r e s u l t e d i n a more f a v o u r a b l e view o f t h e p r e s e n t  s y s t e m , however, t h i s was not t h e  case.  106 5.2  LIMITATIONS OF THE ALTERNATIVE A s the  literature  t h e r e are l i m i t a t i o n s Bylaw i s no  r e v i e w o f t h e z o n i n g bylaw a l t e r n a t i v e s found i n any l a n d use c o n t r o l .  a r e a a r e t a k e n as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  Affairs  The R u r a l  Maintenance  different.  The problems and concerns e x p r e s s e d b y r u r a l  Perhaps,  has shown,  if  the  where  writer  the  study  o f those experienced i n other r u r a l  areas.  h a d been  planning  is  employed a t  seen  on  a  residents  the  in  Ministry  province-wide  of  scale,  Municipal a  broader  p e r s p e c t i v e may have been g a i n e d and a d i f f e r e n t a l t e r n a t i v e p r o p o s e d . Another  limitation  is  written description of  the  that  the  p r o p o s a l has  alternative  t h a t the a l t e r n a t i v e i s p l a u s i b l e .  leaves  However,  not  the  it  been  reader  with  i s o n l y when i t  i n a r e a l l i f e s i t u a t i o n t h a t i t s t r u e v a l u e w i l l be known. failure  of  reception that  any it  this  use  receives  control  technique  from the p o l i t i c i a n s  alternative  ascertain i t s 5.3  land  will  be  taken  is  largely  and the  through  tested.  that  A  the  sense  is  tested  The s u c c e s s o r  dependant  public. process  It in  on is  the  hoped  order  to  potential.  THE VALIDITY OF THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE This  Regional  study h a s t r i e d Planners  l a n d use c o n t r o l features  which  and t h e technique  give  it  the  to  address the  rural  concerns e x p r e s s e d b y b o t h  residents.  In  has been d e v e l o p e d . potential  to  be  d o i n g s o , an It  contains  the  alternative a number  a more a p p r o p r i a t e  land  of use  c o n t r o l t h a n t h e S t a n d a r d z o n i n g methods p r e s e n t l y used i n t h e p r o v i n c e . Two s i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e s o f t h i s t e c h n i q u e a r e i t s the than  list  of prohibited  even  appearance.  these It  uses is  uses ( a l l c o u l d be  felt  that  strength.  Firstly,  others being permitted) with the p r o v i s o acceptable, in  a  gives  regulatory  the  bylaw  situation,  p e r s p e c t i v e i s perhaps t h e most one can hope t o a c h i e v e .  a a  positive positive  107 Secondly, and perhaps the feature which above a l l e l s e makes t h i s a worthwhile a l t e r n a t i v e i s the c o n d i t i o n a l zoning technique.  I t provides a  s o l u t i o n t o many o f the complaints which are heard time and time again about  standard  flexibility  zoning.  t o create  Under t h i s  proposal,  the developer  a development which i s not r e s t r i c t e d  s t r i n g e n t r e g u l a t i o n s found  i n a Standard  Zoning  District.  has the by the For the  residents, i t encourages p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the development process o f t h e i r area.  Too o f t e n we hear d i s g r u n t l e d r e s i d e n t s complain t h a t they have  little  say over the development o f t h e i r area.  The c o n d i t i o n a l zoning  technique encourages these residents t o become i n v o l v e d i n the process. For the Planner, i t requires t h a t he get involved i n the grass roots l e v e l o f planning.  I n other words, i t r e q u i r e s t h a t he get out o f h i s o f f i c e  i n t o the r u r a l areas t o meet w i t h developers and r e s i d e n t s a l i k e t o t r y and negotiate the best p o s s i b l e development f o r future generations. This a l t e r n a t i v e should be considered as a p o t e n t i a l l y v i a b l e land use c o n t r o l technique, designed w i t h the needs and d e s i r e s o f r u r a l B r i t i s h Columbians i n mind.  I f nothing e l s e , i t should be considered as an idea  deserving o f o b j e c t i v e examination by f e l l o w planners, p o l i t i c i a n s and the public.  108  BIBLIOGRAPHY B a i l e y , Bruce R., "The Use and Abuse o f Contract Zoning", U.C.L.A. Law Review, V o l . 12:2, 1964/65 pp. 897-916. B e l l , D., "The U.S. as a Mass S o c i e t y " , i n A l e x Irikeles (Ed.), Reading on Modern Society, Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey, P r e n t i c e H a l l , 1966, pp. 71-86. B.C. M i n i s t r y o f Municipal A f f a i r s and Housing, Planning Services Division, "Technical Guide For the Preparation o f O f f i c i a l Settlement Plans, A p r i l , 1979. Boulding, K., "The O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Quadrangle Books, 1968.  Revolution", Chicago,  Buck, Peter L., "Modern Land Use C o n t r o l " , Real E s t a t e Law and P r a c t i c e , course handbook, s e r i e s no. 143, New York, 1978. Burnett, P. and L. Hansen, " Floodplain/Shoreland Management : A Guide f o r L o c a l Zoning O f f i c i a l s " , Department o f N a t u r a l Resources, Madison, Wisconsin, 1982. Carlson, Steven A., "Land Use Planning: A R u r a l Focus", 1977, U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, S e a t t l e .  Phd.,  Contemporary Studies P r o j e c t , "Rural Land Use Regulation i n Iowa: An E m p i r i c a l A n a l y s i s o f County Board o f Adjustment P r a c t i c e s " , Iowa Law Review, V o l . 68, no. 5, J u l y 1983, pp. 1083-1283. Continuing L e g a l Education Society o f Contracts", Centre f o r Continuing Vancouver, B.C., 1976.  B.C., "Land Use Education, U.B.C.,  Continuing L e g a l Education Society o f B.C., "Land Use C o n t r o l i n B.C.", Centre f o r Continuing Education, U.B.C., Vancouver, B.C., 1979. "Contract Zoning: A F l e x i b l e Technique f o r P r o t e c t i n g Maine M u n i c i p a l i t i e s " , U n i v e r s i t y o f Maine Law Review, V o l . 24, 1972, pp. 263-279. C o u n c i l on Environment Q u a l i t y , "The Costs o f Sprawl i n the U.S.A.", E k i s t i c s , V o l . 40, no. 239, October 1975, pp. 266-272. Crawford, Clan J r . , "Strategy and T a c t i c s i n Municipal Zoning", P r e n t i c e - H a l l , New Jersey, 1969. E l l i c k s o n , Robert C , " A l t e r n a t i v e s t o Zoning: Covenants, Nuisance Rules and Fines as Land Use C o n t r o l s " , The U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago Law Review, V o l . 40, no. 4, Summer, 1973, pp. 681-781.  109 E n g l a n d , J . L . , W . E . Gibbons and B . L . J o h n s o n , "The Impact o f a R u r a l Environment on V a l u e s " , Rural Sociology, V o l . 44(1), 1979, p p . 119-136. Fishman, S t e v e n B . , "The C o n t r a c t Z o n i n g Method Policy," Urban Law A n n u a l , 1972, p p . 219-226. Forrest, C l y d e W., Proceedings o f I l l i n o i s , 1970.  and  Public  "Change: The R e c u r r i n g Z o n i n g Issue", the I n s t i t u t e on Z o n i n g , University of  Getzel, Judith and C . Thurow (Ed.), "Rural and Smalltown P l a n n i n g " , p r e p a r e d f o r The Oldwest R e g i o n a l Commission, p r e p a r e d b y The American P l a n n i n g a s s o c i a t i o n , Washington, D . C . , 1979. G l e n n , N.D. and L . H i l l J r . , " R u r a l and Urban D i f f e r e n c e s in Attitudes and Behaviour i n The U n i t e d States", in The A n n a l s , A . A . P . S . S . , V o l . 429, J a n u a r y , 1977, p p . 3 6 - 5 0 . G o l d b e r g , M. and P. Horwood, "Zoning: I t s C o s t s and Relevance f o r t h e 1 9 8 0 ' s " , F r a s e r I n s t i t u t e , 1980, Vancouver, B . C . Goodman, W . I . and E . C . F r e u n d , " P r i n c i p l e s and P r a c t i c e o f Urban P l a n n i n g " , Washington, D . C . , 1968. H a r k n e s s , Gary C , "Development P e r m i t s " i n C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l Education Society o f B . C . , Land Use C o n t r o l i n B . C . , C e n t r e f o r C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n , U . B . C . , Vancouver, B . C . , 1979. Hart, D. and W. Scott, "The O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Imparative", A c b r d n i s t r a t i o n and S o c i e t y , V o l . 7, November, p p . 259-285. Harvey, R . O . , and W . A . V . C l a r k , "The Nature and Economics o f Urban S p r a w l " , Land Economics, V o l . 4 1 , n o . 1, February, 1965, p p . 1-9. H i n d s , D . S . , N . G . C a m and N. M c G r a w - H i l l Company, 1979.  Ordway,  'Winning  at  Zoning",  H u d d l e s t o n , J a c k R. and Thomas K r a u s k o p f , "Further Evidence C o n c e r n i n g L o c a l C o n t r o l o f Land U s e " , Land E c o n o m i c s , V o l . 56, n o . 4, November, 1980, p p . 471-476. Hughes, W.G., "Land Use Controls-Flexibility D i s c r e c t i o n " , masters thesis, School o f Carmunity R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U . B . C . , 1982.  and and  Ince, John G . , "Land Use Law: A Study o f L e g i s l a t i o n G o v e r n i n g Land Use i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a " , C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l E d u c a t i o n S o c i e t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, Centre f o r Continuing Education, U . B . C . , Vancouver, B . C . , 1977.  110  Kerr, C , J.T. Dunlop, F.H. Harbison and CA. Myers, "Industrialism and Industrial Man", Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 1960. Kmiec, Douglas, W., "Land Use Deregulation: An Alternative Free Enterprise Development System", Zoning and Planning Handbook, Chapter 16, Clark Boardman Co. Ltd., New York, 1983, pp. 309-326. Lauf, Ted F., "Floodplain and Lakeshore Use Controls-The Wisconsin Experience i n Clyde W. Forrest, Change: The Recurring Zoning Issue, Proceedings of the Institute on Zoning, University of I l l i n o i s , 1970. Mandelker, Daniel R., "The Company, Inc., 1971.  Zoning  Dilemma",  Bobbs-Merrill  McGrath, Nicholas J . Jr., "Conditional Zoning: F l e x i b i l i t y i n the Land Use Process, i n Perter L. Buck (Ed.), Modern Land Use Control, Real Estate Law and Practice, course handbook, series no. 143, New York, 1978. Meshenberg, Michael J., "The Administration of Flexible Zoning Techniques", A.S.P.O., Planning Advisory Service, report no. 318. Miller, Michael K. and A.E. Luloff, "Who i s Rural? A Typological Approach to the Examination of Rurality", Rural Sociology, Vol. 46(4), 1981, pp. 608-625. Miller, William S., "Conditional Zoning i s Coming to Oregon", The Municipal Attorney, Vol. 12, no. 5, May 1972, pp. 98-105. Milner, James B., "An Introduction to Zoning Legislation, Canada Bar Review, 1962, p. 1.  Enabling  Nelson, Robert H., "Zoning and Property Rights: An Analysis of the American System of Land Use Regulation", Land Economics, Vol. 56, no. 1, February, 1980, pp. 117-123. Ottensmann, John R., "Urban Sprawl, Land Values and the Density of Development, Land Economics, No. 4, November, 1977, pp. 389-400. Pearson, Norman, "What Price Suburbia?", Regional Planning Board, November, 1967.  Lower  Mainland  Piatt, George M., "Valid Spot Zoning: A Creative Tool for F l e x i b i l i t y of Land Use", Oregon Law Review, Vol. 48, no. 3, April, 1969, pp. 245-262. Porter, Brian J., "The Land Use Contract: Its Validity as a Means of Use and Development Control", masters thesis, School of Community and Regional Planning, University of B.C., 1973.  Ill E n g l a n d , J . L . , W . E . Gibbons and B . L . J o h n s o n , "The Impact o f a R u r a l Environment on V a l u e s " , Rural Sociology, V o l . 44(1), 1979, p p . 119-136. Fishman, S t e v e n B . , "The C o n t r a c t Z o n i n g Method Policy," Urban Law A n n u a l , 1972, p p . 219-226. Forrest, Clyde W., Proceedings o f I l l i n o i s , 1970.  and  Public  "Change: The R e c u r r i n g Z o n i n g Issue", the I n s t i t u t e on Z o n i n g , University of  Getzel, Judith and C . Thurow (Ed.), "Rural and Smalltown P l a n n i n g " , p r e p a r e d f o r The Oldwest R e g i o n a l Commission, p r e p a r e d by The American P l a n n i n g a s s o c i a t i o n , Washington, D . C . , 1979. G l e n n , N.D. and L . H i l l J r . , " R u r a l and Urban D i f f e r e n c e s in Attitudes' and Behaviour i n The U n i t e d States", i n The A n n a l s , A . A . P . S . S . , V o l . 429, J a n u a r y , 1977, p p . 3 6 - 5 0 . G o l d b e r g , M. and P. Horwood, "Zoning: I t s C o s t s and Relevance f o r t h e 1 9 8 0 ' s " , F r a s e r I n s t i t u t e , 1980, Vancouver, B . C . Goodman, W . I . and E . C . F r e u n d , " P r i n c i p l e s and P r a c t i c e o f Urban P l a n n i n g " , Washington, D . C . , 1968. H a r k n e s s , Gary C , "Development P e r m i t s " i n C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l Education Society o f B . C . , Land Use C o n t r o l i n B . C . , C e n t r e f o r C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n , U . B . C . , Vancouver, B . C . , 1979. Hart, D. and W. Scott, "The O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Imparative", A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and S o c i e t y , V o l . 7, November, p p . 259-285. Harvey, R . O . , and W . A . V . C l a r k , "The Nature and Economics o f Urban S p r a w l " , Land Economics, V o l . 41, n o . 1, February, 1965, p p . 1-9. H i n d s , D . S . , N . G . C a m and N. M c G r a w - H i l l Company, 1979.  Ordway,  ''Winning  at  Zoning",  H u d d l e s t o n , J a c k R. and Thomas K r a u s k o p f , "Further Evidence C o n c e r n i n g L o c a l C o n t r o l o f Land U s e " , Land E c o n o m i c s , V o l . 56, n o . 4, November, 1980, p p . 471-476. Hughes, W.G., "Land Use Controls-Flexibility D i s c r e c t i o n " , masters thesis, School of Caxmunity R e g i o n a l P l a n n i n g , U . B . C . , 1982.  and and  Ince, John G . , "Land Use Law: A Study o f L e g i s l a t i o n G o v e r n i n g Land Use i n B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a " , C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l E d u c a t i o n S o c i e t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, Centre f o r Continuing Education, U . B . C . , Vancouver, B . C . , 1977.  112 Province o f B r i t i s h Columbia, "Municipal A c t " , Queens P r i n t e r , V i c t o r i a , B . C . R a f e r t , C h e r y l A . , "Spot Z o n i n g " , 1982, p p . 457-466.  R.S.B.C.,  Urban Law A n n u a l , V o l .  1982,  23,  Raherikamp, S a c h s , W e l l s and A s s o c i a t e s I n c . , "Innovative Zoning: A Digest o f the L i t e r a t u r e " , w i t h A . S . P . O . , f o r the U.S. Department o f Housing and Urban Development, December, 1977. Raherikamp, S a c h s , W e l l s and A s s o c i a t e s I n c . , "Innovative Zoning: A L o c a l O f f i c i a l s Guidebook", w i t h A . S . P . O . and D. S t o l o f f f o r t h e U . S . Department o f H o u s i n g and Urban Development, November, 1977. Real E s t a t e Research C o r p . , "The C o s t s o f S p r a w l - D e t a i l e d C o s t A n a l y s i s " , prepared for H.U.D. and the E.P.A., U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , A p r i l , 1974, Washington, D . C . Real  E s t a t e Research C o r p . , "The C o s t s o f S p r a w l - L i t e r a t u r e Review and B i b l i o g r a p h y " , p r e p a r e d f o r H . U . D . and t h e E . P . A . , U . S . Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , A p r i l , 1974, Washington, D.C.  Rhode I s l a n d Statewide P l a n n i n g Program, "Methods o f E l j j r i i n a t i n g C o n f l i c t s " , T e c h n i c a l Paper n o . 82, A p r i l 1979. Riukin, M.D., " N e g o t i a t e d Development: A Breakthrough in E n v i r o n m e n t a l C o n t r o v e r s i e s " , i n Management and C o n t r o l o f Growth, The Urban Land i n s t i u t u t e , V o l . 4 , 1975, pp. 289-294, Washington, D . C . Rueter, F r e d r i c k H. and P h i l l i p Kushner, "Economic I n c e n t i v e s f o r Land Use C o n t r o l " , U . S . E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n Agency, Washington, D . C , F e b r u a r y , 1977. Scott, John N . , "Toward a S t r a t e g y f o r U t i l i z a t i o n o f C o n t r a c t and C o n d i t i o n a l Z o n i n g " , J o u r n a l o f Urban Law, V o l . 57, n o . 1, August 1973, p p . 94-111. S m i t h , L e s l i e W. and K a r e n K. P e t e r s e n , " R u r a l - U r b a n D i f f e r e n c e s in Tolerance: Stoufers' "Cultural Shock" Hypothesis Revisited", R u r a l S o c i o l o g y , V o l . 4 5 ( 2 ) , 1980, p p . 256-271. T a r l o c k , A . Dan, "Toward a R e v i s e d T h e o r y o f Z o n i n g " , in Management and C o n t r o l o f Growth, V o l . 1, 1975, p p . 228-237. Urban Land Management L t d . , "The New B . C . L a n d Use C o n t r o l Procedures", f o r the B . C . Real Estate A s s o c i a t i o n , February, 1979. W i l l i a m Graham C o n s u l t a n t s L t d . , "Improving Land Use C o n t r a c t s " , f o r t h e B . C . R e a l E s t a t e A s s o c a t i o n , F e b r u a r y , 1977.  113  W i l l i t s , F.K., R.C. Bealer and D.M. C r i d e r , "Leveling o f A t t i t u d e s i n Mass Society: R u r a l i t y and T r a d i t i o n a l M o r a l i t y i n America", Rural Sociology, V o l . 38(1), 1973, pp. 36-45. Wilson, J . G a i t , "Development Permits", i n Continuing Legal Education Society o f B.C., Land Use Control i n B.C., Centre f o r Continuing Education, U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1979. Windsor, Duane, "A C r i t i q u e o f the Costs o f Sprawl", American Planning A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , V o l . 45, no. 3, J u l y 1979, pp. 279-292. Wright, Robert R. and susan Webber, "Land Use i n a N u t s h e l l " , West P u b l i c a t i o n Company, S t . Paul, Minnesota, 1978.  114  APPENDIX  A  REGIONAL DISTRICT OF OKANAGAN-SIMILKAMEEN BYLAW NO.  638  BUILDING BYLAW  A Bylaw for the administration and enforcement of the b u i l d ing code. WHEREAS Section 740 of the Municipal Act provides that the regulations made thereunder and the building code established thereby apply to the Regional D i s t r i c t of Okanagan-Similkameen. Now therefore, the Board of the Regional D i s t r i c t of OkanaganSimilkameen i n open meeting assembled enacts as follows: 1.  TITLE This Bylaw may be cited for a l l purposes as the "Regional D i s t r i c t of Okanagan-Similkameen Building Bylaw No. 688, 1982".  2.  DEFINITIONS In this Bylaw, "agent" includes a person, firm, or corporation representing the owner, by designation or contract, and i n t e r a l i a includes a hired tradesman and contractor who may be granted permits for work within the limitations of his licence. "authority having j u r i s d i c t i o n " means the Regional D i s t r i c t Board and the agent thereof that have authority- over the subject that i s regulated. "building code" means the building code established by the regulations made under Section 740 of the Municipal Act.  3.  APPLICATION (1)  The provisions of this Bylaw apply to that portion of the Regional D i s t r i c t of Okanagan-Similkameen contained within E l e c t o r a l Areas A,B,C,D,E,F and H, and more precisely as described i n the Letters Patent, as amended, incorporating said D i s t r i c t :  (2)  Except as "otherwise provided this Section, where  i n Subsection  (3) of  (a)  A building i s b u i l t , this By,law applies to the design and construction of the building.  (b)  The whole or part of a building i s moved, either into or from the E l e c t o r a l Area or from one property to another within the E l e c t o r a l Area, .fhis Bylaw applies to the building or part thereof moved and to any remaining part affected by the change.  (c)  The whole or part of a building is demolished, this Bylaw applies to the demolition and to any remaining part affected by the change,  (d)  A building i s altered, this Bylaw applies to the alterations, and to a l l parts of the building affected by the change.  (Sections 1, 2 & 3) Bylaw No. 688  115 continued (e)  Repairs are made to a building, this Bylaw applies to such repairs.  (f)  The class of occupancy of a building or part thereof i s changed, this Bylaw applies to a l l parts of the building affected by the change.  (a)  This Bylaw does not apply to farm buildings other than those used as residential buildings on land c l a s s i f i e d as Farmland by the Provincial Assessor.  (b)  This Bylaw does not apply to minor non-structural alterations valued at less than One Thousand Dollars (51,000.00) as described by the Building Inspector, made to buildings used or intended for (  i) single family houses;  ( i i ) private garages of r e s i d e n t i a l accessory buildings; (iii)  (c)  a g r i c u l t u r a l or h o r t i c u l t u r a l  ( iv)  animal raising; or  (  pountry  v)  purposes;  raising.  This Bylaw does not apply to repairs made to buildings used or intended for (  i) single family houses;  ( i i ) private garages or r e s i d e n t i a l accessory buildings; (iii)  (d)  a g r i c u l t u r a l or h o r t i c u l t u r a l  ( iv)  animal raising; or  (  pountry  v)  purposes;  raising.  This Bylaw does not apply to buildings on a mining property as defined i n the Mineral Act, except that the Bylaw applies to buildings on a mining property used or intended for housing or r e s i d e n t i a l accommodation of persons.  Swimming Pools (a)  "Pool" includes any a r t i f i c i a l pool i n which the depth of water could attain at least sixty (60) centimeters which i s intended for recreational use.  (b)  Public pools s h a l l conform to those mandatory provisions of the B.C. Provincial Regulations289/72 Health Act-Governing Swimming Pools, the Zoning Bylaws of the Regional D i s t r i c t , and the regulations of this Bylaw; i n case of design variance, the aforementioned mandatory provisions of the B.C. Provincial Regulations s h a l l apply.  (c)  Private pools s h a l l conform to the regulations of this Bylaw and the Zoning Bylaws of the Regional D i s t r i c t .  (Section 3) Bylaw No. 688  116 (4)  continued (d)  Construction permits are required i n accordance with the provisions of this Bylaw.  (e)  Construction s h a l l meet the structural requirements of the Building Bylaw of the Regional D i s t r i c t , to withstand a l l forces anticipated: (  i)  provide fencing or equivalent barrier in a manner so that unsuspecting persons or small children cannot obtain entrance into the pool area, also being provided with a gate closure and latch;  ( i i ) the pool floor s h a l l have a slope not greater than thirty (30) centimeters i n two point four (2.4) meters where the water depth i s less than one point zero five (1.05) meters. The pool basin s h a l l be a l i g h t colour. (iii)  At no time to create a public health nuisance.  RESPONSIBILITY OF OWNER Neither the granting of a permit nor the approval of the drawings and specifications, nor inspections made by the 3uilding Inspector during the erection of the building s h a l l , in any way, relieve the owner of such building from f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y for carrying out the work in accordance with the requirements of this Bylaw. PROHIBITION (1)  No person s h a l l commence or continue any part of the work referred to in Subsection (2) of Section 3 unless a building permit has been obtained.  (2)  The written approval of the Building Inspector s h a l l be obtained before: (a)  the placing or pouring of any concrete;  (b)  a foundation below land surface i s b a c k f i l l e d or covered,-  (c)  the structural framework of a building or structure i s covered or concealed.  PERMITS (1)  Where: (a)  an application has been made, and  (b)  the proposed work set out in the application conforms to this Bylaw and a l l other applicable bylaws,  the Building Inspector s h a l l issue the permit for which the application i s made. (2)  The application referred to in Subsection Section 5 s h a l l : (a)  (1) of  be made on the form prescribed by the Building Inspector; (Section 3, 4, 5 & 6) Bylaw No. 688  117  continued (b)  be  (c)  state  (d)  i n c l u d e c o p i e s i n t r i p l i c a t e of the s p e c i f i c a t i o n s and s c a l e d r a w i n g s o f the b u i l d i n g w i t h r e s p e c t to which the work i s t o be c a r r i e d out showing -  Ce)  signed by the  the  applicant;  intended  use  C  i)  the  dimensions  (  ii)  the  proposed  of  of  use  the  the of  building;  building;  each  room o r  floor  tiii)  the dimensions of the b u i l d i n g i s , or i s to  (, i v )  the grades of land referred  (.  the p o s i t i o n , - h e i g h t , and h o r i z o n t a l d i m e n s i o n s o f a l l b u i l d i n g s on the land r e f e r r e d to i n Subclause ( i i i ) ; and  v)  c o n t a i n any Bylaw or by  l a n d on w h i c h be, situated;  the s t r e e t s a b u t t i n g to i n Subclause ( i i i )  other information required the B u i l d i n g Inspector.  The s c h e d u l e o f f e e s t o be c h a r g e d of a permit under t h i s Bylaw i s as  area;  the  the ;  by  this  f o r the i s s u a n c e follows:  (a)  A fee of Ten D o l l a r s ($10.00) f o r t h e f i r s t One Thousand D o l l a r s (51,000.00) or f r a c t i o n thereof o f t h e e s t i m a t e d v a l u e o f t h e work' c o v e r e d by the p e r m i t , and Three D o l l a r s (53.00) for each a d d i t i o n a l One T h o u s a n d D o l l a r s ( 5 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ) or f r a c t i o n thereof of the e s t i m a t e d v a l u e of the work c o v e r e d b y t h e p e r m i t up t o an e s t i m a t e d value of F i f t y Thousand D o l l a r s ($50,000.00); and One D o l l a r ( 5 1 - 0 0 ) f o r e a c h One T h o u s a n d D o l l a r s (51,000.00) or f r a c t i o n thereof of the e s t i m a t e d v a l u e o f the work i n e x c e s s o f Fifty Thousand D o l l a r s ( 5 5 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ) . The e s t i m a t e d v a l u e o f the work s h a l l be d e t e r m i n e d by the Building Inspector,-  (b)  A fee ing;  (c)  A f e e o f Two D o l l a r s ( $ 2 . 0 0 ) for each plumbing f i x t u r e up t o t e n (10) f i x t u r e s and One D o l l a r ($1.00) per f i x t u r e a f t e r the f i r s t ten (10) fixtures.  Every  of  permit  Five  is  Dollars  i s s u e d upon  ($5.00)  the  for  moving  condition  a  build-  that:  (a)  construction is months from the  to be s t a r t e d w i t h i n s i x (6) date of issuance of the permit;  (b)  con and the the  (c)  the e x t e r i o r o f any b u i l d i n g s h a l l be f i n i s h e d in durable, weather-resistant materials prior to employment i n the p a r t i c u l a r use f o r which the b u i l d i n g i s i n t e n d e d . P r i o r to occupancy o f t h e b u i l d i n g , a n o c c u p a n c y p e r m i t m u s t be o b t a i n e d from the B u i l d i n g Inspector.  s t r u c t i o n must proceed i n a d i l i g e n t manner b e c o m p l e t e d w i t h i n e i g h t e e n (18) m o n t h s o f date of i s s u a n c e of the permit - otherwise p e r m i t becomes n u l l and v o i d ;  ( S e c t i o n 6) B y l a w N o . 688  118 continued (5)  A permit shall not be issued where, i n the opinion of the Building Inspector, the results of the tests referred to in Clause (b) of Subsection (1) of Section 8 are not satisfactory.  (6)  Where a single storey r e s i d e n t i a l building having a floor area of less than forty-six (46) square meters to be placed or erected on the land w i l l be occupied only as seasonal accommodation for temporary farm help engaged i n farming on the land owned or leased for farm purposes, the owner of the land or his authorized agent may make application for a Building Permit Exemption C e r t i f i c a t e and upon issuance, the provisions of this Bylaw s h a l l not apply to such building during such use.  DOCUMENTS ON THE SITE (1)  The person to whom the permit i s issued s h a l l , during construction, keep (a)  posted in a conspicuous place on the property, in respect of which the permit was issued, a copy of the building permit or a poster or placard approved by the Building Inspector i n lieu thereof; and,  (b)  a copy of the approved drawings and specifications referred to i n Clause (d) of Subsection (2) of Section 6, on the property i n respect of which the permit was issued.  POWERS OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR (1)  The Building Inspector may: (a)  enter any premises at any reasonable time for the purpose of administering this Bylaw;  (b)  direct that tests of materials, devices, construction methods, structural assemblies or foundation conditions be made, or s u f f i c i e n t evidence or proof be submitted at the expense of the owner, where such evidence or proof i s necessary to determine whether the material, devices, construction or foundation meets the requirements of this Bylaw. The records of such tests s h a l l be kept available for inspection during the construction of the building and for sucn a period thereafter as required by the Building Inspector;  (c)  direct by written notice, or by attaching a placard to premises, the correction of any cond i t i o n where, i n the opinion of the Building . Inspector, such condition violates the provisions of this Bylaw;  (d)  revoke a permit where there i s a v i o l a t i o n of the provisions of Subsection (4) of Section 5.  PENALTY (1)  Any person who contravenes any provision of this Bylaw is guilty of an offence punishable by way of summary conviction.  (2)  Each day during which such contravention is continued shall be deemed to constitute a new and separate offence (Section 6,7,8 & 9) Bylaw No. 688  119  10.  CLIMATIC DATA When climatic data i s required for the design of b u i l d ings, i t s h a l l be the data provided by the following table:  ELECTORAL AREA A,3,C  D,E,F  APPLY TO B.C BUILDING COC£ 1980.  H  1.  January 2%% Design Temperature  T  2.  January 1% Design Temperature  -18°C  3.  July 2*5% Design Drybulb Temperature  4.  July 2>j% Design Wetbulb Teroerature  5.  Annual Total Degree-days below 18°C  32  . ,  3513  4554  2.3.1.1.  6.  Maximum Fifteen Minute Rainfall  10mm  lOmrn  10mm  2.3.1.1.**  7.  Maximun One Day Rainfall  35mm  45mm  37mm  2.3.1.1.  8.  Annual Total Precipitation  342mn  296mm  359mm  2.3.1.1.  9.  Maximun Snow Load on the Ground (KN/M2)  1.4  1.3  2.3  2.3.1.1.  .24 .32 .42  2.3.1.1. 2.3.1.1. 2.3.1.1.  10.  Wird Effects: Probability 1/10(KN/m) 1/30 " 1/100 ••  11.  Seisnic Zone  12.  Horizontal Design Ground Acceleration (A)  2  16°C' ' -16°C -27°C  2.3.1.1.  -18°C  -30°C  • 2.3.1.1.  33°C  33°C  32°C  2.3.1.1.  20°C  20°C  20 C  2.3.1.1.  95  .30' .43 .59 . Zone 1 .02  .40 .50 .68  C  Zone 1 Zore 1 .02  .02  2.3.1.1. 2.3.1.1.  ** B.C. Plunbing Code, 1980. 11.  The following Bylaws are hereby repealed: RDOS RDOS RDOS RDOS  Building Building Building Building  Bylaw Bylaw Bylaw Bylaw  No. No. No. No.  265, 1975. 265, Amendment Bylaw No. 326, 1976. 265, Amendment Bylaw No. 389, 1977. 544, 1980.  121  APPENDIX Province of British Columbia  Ministry Of the Environment  B  Parliament Buildings Victoria British Columbia  OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY MINISTER  '  V8V1X4  .  April  M i n i s t r y of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n & Highways, 380 Cherry Avenue, P e n t i c t o n , B r i t i s h Columbia. V2A 3L7  1i,  Our F i l e : Your F i l e :  1983 0305030-22 24-21-78(1348)  A t t e n t i o n : D i s t r i c t Highways Manager Dear S i r : Re:  Proposed S u b d i v i s i o n of P a r t of DL. Similkameen R i v e r  392,  SDYD -  T h i s l e t t e r i s i n r e p l y to your correspondence o f December 17, 1982.  . ...  Pursuant to S e c t i o n 82(1) of the Land T i t l e A c t , consent i s g i v e n f o r the a p p r o v a l of the above-mentioned p l a n o f s u b d i v i s i o n , s u b j e c t to the s u b d i v i d e r e n t e r i n g i n t o a covenant r e g i s t r a b l e under S e c t i o n 215, which s h a l l run w i t h the land and s h a l l e f f e c t the f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s f o r each l o t c r e a t e d , i n c l u d i n g any remainder o f the p r o p e r t y : "1.  H e r e a f t e r , no b u i l d i n g s h a l l be c o n s t r u c t e d , nor m o b i l e home l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) metres of the n a t u r a l boundary o f Similkameen River or w i t h i n seven p o i n t f i v e (7.5) metres of the landward toe of any dyke, whichever i s the g r e a t e r setback.  2.  H e r e a f t e r , no area used f o r h a b i t a t i o n , b u s i n e s s , or storage of goods damageable by f l o o d w a t e r s s h a l l be l o c a t e d w i t h i n any b u i l d i n g at an e l e v a t i o n such t h a t the u n d e r s i d e o f the f l o o r system t h e r e o f i s l e s s than 412.0 metres G.S.C. datum. In the case of a m o b i l e home, the ground l e v e l or top of c o n c r e t e or a s p h a l t pad on which i t i s l o c a t e d s h a l l be no lower than the above d e s c r i b e d e l e v a t i o n .  3.  The r e q u i r e d e l e v a t i o n may be achieved by s t r u c t u r a l e l e v a t i o n o f the s a i d h a b i t a b l e , b u s i n e s s , or storage area or by adequately compacted l a n d f i l l on which any b u i l d i n g i s to be c o n s t r u c t e d or m o b i l e home.located, or by a combination of both s t r u c t u r a l e l e v a t i o n and landfill. No area below the r e q u i r e d e l e v a t i o n s h a l l be used f o r the i n s t a l l a t i o n of f u r n a c e s or o t h e r f i x e d 2  123  APPENDIX C  Section 13  AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (1)  (A-R)  PURPOSE: The purpose of t h i s D i s t r i c t i s to e s t a b l i s h an area which i s i n t r a n s i t i o n from a g r i c u l t u r a l use to low-density r e s i d e n t i a l u s e , and to ensure that f u t u r e development i s i n keeping with the p r e v a i l i n g land u s e .  (2)  PERMISSIVE USES: The f o l l o w i n g uses and no others s h a l l be permitted A-R D i s t r i c t : (a)  A g r i c u l t u r e , subject to the (i)  (ii)  NOTE:  the  following:  Except as provided by subclause ( i i ) , on any l o t or s i t e of l e s s than o n e - h a l f (H) a c r e , only household pets are permitted and no h o r s e , donkey, mule, ninny, cow, goat, sheep or pig s h a l l be a household pet whether or not i t i s owned by occupants of the residence and not kept f o r remuneration, h i r e or s a l e ; On any l o t or s i t e , commercial kennels, s t a b l e s , mink farms, f e e d l o t s , p i g g e r i e s , or other s i m i l a r s e r v i c e or n o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l , product-based operations s h a l l be p r o h i b i t e d , save and except the r a i s i n g of f o w l , r a b b i t s , and other small f u r - b e a r i n g animals as a home occupation pursuant to the p r o v i s i o n s of subclauses ( i ) to ( v ) , i n c l u s i v e , o f clause (e) of subsection (2) of s e c t i o n 12; See Section 13 (11)  (iii)  in  (a)  (i)  - L i v e s t o c k (Special  provisions)  The p r o c e s s i n g , p a c k i n g , and s a l e of a g r i c u l t u r a l produce grown on the same l o t or s i t e or land of the same ownership only s h a l l be permitted.  (b)  Single-family dwellings:  (c)  Mobile homes provided they have a f l o o r area of not l e s s than seven hundred f i f t y (750) square f e e t and have a minimum width as o r i g i n a l l y designed and manufactured of not l e s s than s i x teen (16) f e e t and are placed on permanent foundations with f u l l s k i r t i n g blending i n with the u n i t and subject to the p r o v i s i o n s as o u t l i n e d i n subsection (11) of Section 12. On s i t e s of f i v e acres or more i n a r e a , any mobile home or f a c t o r y b u i l t u n i t home having a f l o o r area of not l e s s than four hundred and eighty (480) square f e e t , s i t e d not l e s s than twenty-five (25) f e e t from any property l i n e , and i n the case of mobile homes subject to the p r o v i s i o n s of subsection (n) of Section 12.  (d)  P i c k e r ' s Cabins;  (e)  Home o c c u p a t i o n s , subject to the p r o v i s i o n s of clause (e) of subsection (2) of Section 12, provided that on any l o t or s i t e of l e s s than o n e - h a l f (%) a c r e , the area used f o r home o c c u pations s h a l l not exceed f i v e hundred (500) square f e e t ;  (f)  P u b l i c or p r i v a t e  (g)  Churches;  (h)  Comiuufiity h a l l s ;  schools, including  kindergartens;  Section 13 D  124  (i)  Public open-land recreational and institutional uses, including parks, playgrounds and cemeteries;  (j)  Public service or u t i l i t y buildings and structures, with no exterior storage of any kind and no garages for the repair and maintenance of equipment;  (k)  Buildings and structures accessory to the uses permitted under clauses (a) to ( i ) , inclusive.  STANDARDS: Unless otherwise specified, every use of land and every building or structure permitted in the A-R District shall comply with the provisions of subsections (4) to (11).inclusive, and section 28. MINIMUM SITE AREA and MINIMUM SITE WIDTH: Amended by authority of Zoning Amendment Bylaw So. 384, 1977 adopted by the Regional Board, December IS, 1977. (a) ( i ) Where both an approved community or municipal water system and a municipal sewage collection system are provided, the minimum site area shall be Six Thousand (6,000) square feet and the minimum site width shall be Fifty (50) feet; ( i i ) Where an approved community or municipal water system is provided, but a municipal sewage collection system i s not provided, the minimum site area shall be Nine Thousand (9,000) square feet and the minimum site width shall be Seventy (70) feet; ( i i i ) Where neither an approved public water system nor a community or municipal sewage collection system is provided, the minimum site area shall be Eighteen Thousand (18,000) square feet and the minimum site width shall be Seventy (70) feet. (b)  In the case of uses permitted under clauses (g) and (h) of subsection (2), the minimum site area shall be one-half (1/2) acre;  (c)  In the case of uses permitted under clause (j) of subsection (2), the minimum site area shall be fifteen hundred (1,500) square feet and the minimum site width shall be twenty-five (25) feet;  (d)  Lots created prior to the adoption of this Bylaw, regardless of area or dimensions, may be used for any of the permitted uses of the A-R District, provided the method by which sewage i s disposed of is satisfactory to the Medical Health Officer.  5) BUILDINGS PER LOT: (a)  Not more than one (1) single-family dwelling shall be permitted upon a l o t , except that where the lot exceeds one-half [h) acre in area, or forms part of a site which exceeds one-half (%) acre in area, one (1) additional single-family dwelling or mobile home shall be permitted for each five (5) acres or fraction thereof of lot or site area in excess of one-half (4) acre, provided that any dwelling units in excess of two (2) on any lot or site shall be used solely to accommodate families engaged in agruculture on the same l o t or site.  (b)  Picker's cabins shall be limited to one (1) for each five (5) acres of lot or site area or land of the same ownership used for agricultural purposes.  Section 13 D  125  (6)  YARDS, SET3ACKS: (a)  On any l o t or s i t e , p r i n c i p a l b u i l d i n g s s h a l l be s e t back from the f r o n t and rear l o t l i n e s a distance equal to the height of the b u i l d i n g , or twenty-five (25) f e e t , whichever i s greater, and not l e s s than f i v e (5) f e e t from an i n t e r i o r s i d e l o t l i n e , f i f t e e n (15) f e e t from an e x t e r i o r s i d e l o t l i n e , or twenty (20) f e e t from any other p r i n c i p a l b u i l d i n g on the l o t .  (b)  Accessory b u i l d i n g s s h a l l be s e t back from the f r o n t l o t l i n e the distance s p e c i f i e d or p r i n c i p a l b u i l d i n g s i n clause ( a ) , and not l e s s than three (3) f e e t from a r e a r l o t l i n e and i n t e r i o r s i d e l o t l i n e , f i f t e e n (15) feet from an e x t e r i o r s i d e l o t l i n e , and t e n (10) feet from a p r i n c i p a l b u i l d i n g on the l o t i f detached from such b u i l d i n g .  Replaced by a u t h o r i t y August 21, 1980.  (7)  (8)  of Bylaw No. 551, 1980 adopted by the Board  (c)  Where there i s no rear lane, no b u i l d i n g or s t r u c t u r e or part thereof s h a l l be l o c a t e d w i t h i n ten (10) feet of one s i d e l o t l i n e , except that open, attached carports which provide through access to the r e a r yard may be located w i t h i n f i v e (5) f e e t of a side l o t l i n e .  (d)  Notwithstanding clauses (b) and ( c ) , a l l b u i l d i n g s and s t r u c t u r e s housing l i v e s t o c k s h a l l be l o c a t e d a minimum distance of twenty-five (25) f e e t from any property l i n e and f o r t y (40) f e e t from any dwelling u n i t .  (e)  In no case s h a l l a b u i l d i n g be l o c a t e d centre l i n e than f i f t y (50) f e e t .  c l o s e r to a s t r e e t  SITE COVERAGE: (a)  On any l o t or s i t e of l e s s than one-half (1/2) acre, p r i n c i p a l and accessory b u i l d i n g s together s h a l l not occupy more than t h i r t y (30) percent of the l o t or s i t e area.  (b)  On any l o t or s i t e of one-half (1/2) acre or more, p r i n c i p a l and accessory b u i l d i n g s together s h a l l not occupy more than twenty-five (25 ) percent of the l o t o r s i t e area.  HEIGHT LIMITATION: (a)  On any l o t or s i t e of l e s s than one-half (1/2) a c r e , (i)  p r i n c i p a l buildings (30) f e e t ;  s h a l l not exceed a height o f t h i r t y  (ii)  accessory b u i l d i n g s (15) f e e t .  s h a l l not exceed a height o f f i f t e e n  (b)  On any l o t or s i t e of one-half (1/2) acre or more, no b u i l d i n g s h a l l exceed a height equal to twenty-five (25) percent o f the l o t or s i t e depth, or f i f t y (50) f e e t , whichever i s l e s s , except that i n no case s h a l l dwellings exceed a height of - h i r t y (30) f e e t .  (c)  On any l o t o r s i t e , no fence s h a l l be (i)  (ii)  more than s i x (6) f e e t i n height f o r that p o r t i o n o f fence that does not extend beyond the minimum r e q u i r e d f r o n t yard setback l i n e on the l o t or s i t e ; or more than four (4) feet i n height f o r that p o r t i o n of fence that does extend beyond the minimum required f r o n t yard setback l i n e on the l o t or s i t e .  Section 13 D  126  (9)  (10)  MINIMUM FLOOR AREA: (a)  No dwelling unit, factory built unit home or mobile home shall have a floor area of less than seven hundred f i f t y (750) square feet.  (b)  No picker's cabin, other than a travel t r a i l e r used for such purpose, shall have a floor area of less than one hundred ninety-two (192) square feet nor more than four hundred eighty (480) square feet.  SIGNS: Subject to the Motor-Vehicle Act and the regulations made thereunder: (a)  No signs or advertising displays shall be permitted other than the following: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)  those denoting a home occupation; those denoting the name of the owner or the name or address of the property; those advertising the sale or rental of property; those advertising the sale of agricultural produce grown on the same l o t or site or land of the same ownership; public u t i l i t y and institutional signs, provided that such signs shall not exceed six (6) square feet in area or eight (8) feet in length and shall be limited to one (1) for each street frontage upon which the l o t or site abuts, except that on any lot or site of less than one-half (h) acre, signs listed under subclauses (i) and ( i i ) of this clause shall not exceed one and onehalf (1H) square feet in area.  (b)  Notwithstanding clause (a), one (1) sign only advertising the sale of lots within a residential subdivision, not exceeding f i f t y (50) square feet in area or twelve (12) feet in length, may be erected.  (c)  Roof signs and illuminated or flashing signs shall be prohibited.  (d)  A l l signs advertising the sale of seasonal produce shall be permitted only during the period between June 1 and November 15 in any year.  (e)  No sign shall project over a public right-of-way.  (11) LIVESTOCK (Special Provisions): (a)  On any lot or site of less than two (2) acres, (i)  the total number of horses, sheep, or other similar large animals shall not exceed one (1) for each onehalf [h) acre or fraction thereof of l o t or site area in excess of one-half [H) acre;  Section 13 0  127  ii)  the total number of fowl, rabbits, or other small furbearing animals, or the number of colonies of bees, shall not exceed twenty-five (25), plus one (1) for each five hundred (500) square feet or fraction thereof of l o t or site area in excess of one-half {h) acre.  ii)  notwithstanding subclause ( i i ) above, in the case of chinchillas, the maximum number allowed on a lot or site less than one half (%) acre shall not exceed five hundred (500) while there are no restrictions to the number of chinchillas on lots in excess of one half (h) acre.  All livestock other than household pets shall be properly caged or housed.  Section 13 0  Amendment Bylaw No. Adopted Sept. 21/7  128 APPENDIX D  Section 28  GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (1)  At any highway intersection, no obstruction to sight shall be permitted between the levels of three (3) feet and ten (10) feet above ground level within the triangular area formed by two intersecting right-of-way lines and the line joining the points on such right-of-way lines fifteen (15) feet from the point of intersection.  (2)  Buildings shall not be sited in such a manner as to make impracticable the future legal subdivision of a l o t .  (3)  Off-Street Parking: (a)  Every required off-street parking space shall have a minimum area of one hundred eighty (180) square feet, and shall be so shaped and sited as to provide convenient access to the premises and to a public street;  (b)  For commercial and public uses, a l l required parking spaces shall be surfaced with all-weather, dust-free material;  (c)  All required parking spaces shall be kept clear and unobstructed when not occupied by vehicles;  (d)  Off-street parking space shall be provided as follows: (i)  single-family dwellings  -  (ii)  Multi-family dwellings  - one and one-half (14) spaces per dwelling unit;  (iii)  General commercial use  - one (1) space per 500 square feet of service, office, or retail floor space;  (iv) (v)  two (2) spaces per dwelling unit  Amendment Bylaw No. 16j Adopted June 21/73  Motels, resorts, camp-sites - one (1) space per rental unit; Public, institutional use - one (1) space for every five (5) seats provided for public seating and/or one (1) space per 100 square feet of floor space for recreation or social purposes, whichever i s applicable.  (4)  One (1) travel t r a i l e r only may be permitted in conjunction with a permitted residential use on any lot or site, which may be used for the accommodation of guests or visitors during the period between June 1 and September 15 in any year.  (5)  No l o t or site shall be used for the wrecking or storage of derelict automobiles or as junk yard, and any vehicle which has not been licensed for a period of one (1) year and which i s not housed in a garage or carport shall be deemed to be a derelict vehicle and junk.  (6)  Temporary or mobile buildings or hoarding, the sole purpose Amendme: of which is incidental to the erection or alteration of a principal Bylaw building for which a building permit has been granted, shall be No. 161 permitted provided removal of same shall take place upon completeion Adopte of the principal building or within a period of six months, whichever June 2 comes f i r s t .  (7)  No building shall be erected closer to the bank of the Amendment Byl Shuttleworth Creek than 50 feet. No. 149 Adopted January 18/73  Section 28 0  129  Section 28  GENERAL REQUIREMENTS lSu.b6t£lnted by ojuXhoruity oi Balaw No. 652, 7 987 adopted by the TSooJid, June. 7 7, 79SZ) (7)  (a)  For the purposes of t h i s s e c t i o n the f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n s s h a l l apply: C  i)  (ii)  (b)  "Natural Boundary" - means the v i s i b l e high water mark of any l a k e , r i v e r , stream or other body of water where the presence and a c t i o n of the water are so common and u s u a l and so long continued i n a l l ordinary years as to mark upon the s o i l of the bed of the lake, r i v e r , stream or other body of water a character d i s t i n c t from that of the banks thereof, i n respect to v e g e t a t i o n , as w e l l as i n respect to the nature of the s o i l i t s e l f . "Watercourse" - i s any n a t u r a l or man-made depression with w e l l defined banks and a bed zero point s i x (0.6) metres or more below the surrounding land serving to give d i r e c t i o n to a current of water at l e a s t s i x months of the year or having a drainage area of two (2) square kilometres or more upstream of the point of c o n s i d e r a t i o n , or as r e quired by a designated o f f i c i a l of the M i n i s t r y of Environmen of the_Province of B r i t i s h Columbia.  Notwithstanding any other p r o v i s i o n s of t h i s Bylaw, on f l o o d a b l e land no b u i l d i n g or any p a r t thereof s h a l l be constructed, reconstructed, moved or extended nor s h a l l any mobile home or u n i t , modular home or s t r u c t u r e be l o c a t e d ; (  i)  w i t h i n seven point f i v e (7.5) metres of the n a t u r a l boundary of a l a k e , swamp o r pond; w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) metres of the n a t u r a l boundary of the Similkameen or Tulameen R i v e r s ; w i t h i n t h i r t y (30) metres of the design water l e v e l boundary of the Okanagan River channel; w i t h i n f i f t e e n (15) metres of the n a t u r a l boundary of any other nearby watercourse.  ( ii)  With the underside of the f l o o r system of any area used f o r h a b i t a t i o n , business, or storage of goods damageable by floodwaters, or i n the case of a mobile home or u n i t the ground l e v e l on which i t i s l o c a t e d : lower than zero point s i x (0.6) metres above the 200 year f l o o d l e v e l where i t has been determined by, or to the s a t i s f a c t i o n o f , the M i n i s t r y of Environment; nor lower than three (3) metres above the n a t u r a l boundary of Che Similkameen or Tulameen Rivers; nor lower Chan one point f i v e (1.5) metres above the design water surface p r o f i l e of the Okanagan R i v e r channel; nor lower than one point f i v e (1.5) metres above the n a t u r a l boundary of any other watercourse, lake, swamp or pond, with the excepcion of Okanagan, Osoyoos, Skaha, Tug u l Nuit and Vaseux Lakes, where the minimum e l e v a t i o n ac which a b u i l d i n g may be constructed or mobile u n i t l-?-*ted s h a l l be: Okanagan Lake Osoyoos La<"» Skaha Lake Tug u l Null: T-»"».e Vaseux Lak~  343 .66 280 .70 339 .24 299 .50 329 .49  metres metres metres metres metres  G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C. G.S.C.  datum datum datum datum datum  (Section 28)  130  Section 28  (7) continued (c)  Clause ( b ) ( i i ) s h a l l not apply t o : (  i)  a renovation of an e x i s t i n g b u i l d i n g or s t r u c t u r e used as a residence that does not i n v o l v e an a d d i t i o n thereto;  ( ii)  that p o r t i o n of a b u i l d i n g or s t r u c t u r e to be used as a carport or garage;  (iii)  farm b u i l d i n g s other than dwelling u n i t s and c l o s e d sided l i v e s t o c k housing. Farm dwelling u n i t s on p a r c e l s i z e s 8.1 hectares or greater and w i t h i n the A g r i c u l t u r a l Land Reserve are exempted from the requirements of Clause ( b ) ( i i ) but i f i n a f l o o d a b l e area s h a l l be elevated one (1) metre above the n a t u r a l ground e l e v a t i o n . Closed-sided l i v e s t o c k housing behind 1 i n 200 year standard dykes as approved by the M i n i s t r y of Environment i s exempted from the requirement to floodproof but i f not behind 200 year standard dykes s h a l l a l s o be elevated one (1) metre above the n a t u r a l ground elevation;  ( iv)  l i g h t or heavy i n d u s t r i a l development which i s r e q u i r e d to floodproof to an e l e v a t i o n zero point s i x (0.6) metres l e s s than the Flood Construction L e v e l as determined by the M i n i s t r y of Environment;  (  heavy i n d u s t r y behind 1 i n 200 year standard dykes as approved by Che M i n i s t r y of Environment. Heavy i n d u s t r y includes such uses as manufacturing or processing of wood and paper produces, mecal, heavy e l e c c r i c a l , non-metallic m i n e r a l products, petroleum and c o a l products, i n d u s t r i a l chemicals and by-products and a l l i e d products;  v)  ( vi)  the required e l e v a t i o n may be achieved by s t r u c t u r a l e l e v a t i o n of the s a i d h a b i t a b l e , business, or storage area or by adequately compacted l a n d f i l l on which any b u i l d i n g i s co be conscructed or mobile home l o c a t e d , or by a combination of both s t r u c t u r a l elevacion and landfill. Where l a n d f i l l i s used to achieve the required elevacions stated i n Clause ( b ) ( i i ) above, no p o r t i o n of the landf i l l slope s h a l l be c l o s e r Chan Che discances i n Clause ( b ) ( i ) from Che nacural boundary, and Che face of Che l a n d f i l l slope s h a l l be adequacely procecced againsC erosion from floodwaters. Provided t h a t , w i t h the approval of the Deputy M i n i s t e r of Environment, or h i s designate to ensure that adequate p r o t e c t i o n from f l o o d or erosion hazard i s provided, these requirements may be reduced.  (8)  Temporary or mobile buildings and structures, the sole purpose of which are incidental to the following uses: logging, milling, mining - including gravel extraction and processing, construction of u t i l i t y services, movie filming, shall be permitted for a period not to exceed the l i f e of the aforementioned permitted use or six months, whichever crimes f i r s t , and shall be located at a distance greater than one thousand (1,000) feet from any adjacent residence on any adjacent site. Use and storage of said temporary or mobile buildings and structures shall be only by permit, which may be cancelled when there is a valid and proven objection to the temporary use. As per  on  Amendment Bylaw No.  March 24, 1977  .  330,  1976,  adapted bu the  Reqional  (Section 28)  Board  131  APPENDIX E S e c t i o n  12  FORESTRY/GRAZING DISTRICT (F-G). (1)  PURPOSE: The purpose of this District is to establish an area which has long been utilized as an extensive forestry/grazing d i s t r i c t , and to ensure that future development proceeds in an orderly and economical fashion.  (2)  PERMISSIVE USES: The following uses and no others shall be permitted in the F-G District: (a)  Agriculture;  (b)  Processing and packing of agricultural produce grown on the same l o t or site or land of the same ownership;  (c) Forestry; (d)  Single-family dwellings, factory built unit homes and mobile homes;  (e)  Home occupations, provided that (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)  a home occupation shall be conducted wholly within a building or accessory building; there shall be no exterior display or advertisement, except as provided by subsection (10); there shall be no exterior storage of materials, commodities, or finished products; the use shall not generate t r a f f i c or parking problems within the District; the use shall not produce public offence or nuisance of any kind, by any means;  (f)  Open-land recreational and institutional uses, including cemeteries, golf courses, public recreation areas, stables and kennels, and ancillary uses thereto, but excluding amusement parks, dude ranches, horse or autoracing c i r c u i t s , riding academies and privately owned camp-sites operated for reward;  (g)  Public service or u t i l i t y buildings and structures, with no exterior storage of any kind and no garages for the repair and maintenance of equipment;  (h)  Buildings and structures accessory to the uses permitted in clauses (a) to ( f ) , inclusive.  (Section 12) 0  \  132  (3)  STANDARDS: Every use of land and every building or structure permitted in the F-G District shall comply with the provisions of sub-sections (4) to ( 1 1 ) inclusive, and section 2 8 .  Substituted by authority of Bylaw #675/81 adopted Mar.  (4)  MINIMUM SITE AREA AND MAXIMUM SITE WIDTH: (a)  18/82  (5)  The minimum lot area shall be Fifty ( 5 0 ) acres and the minimum width shall be One Thousand ( 1 , 0 0 0 ) feet, except that: (i)  Lots with a minimum area of 1 , 5 0 0 square feet and a minimum width of twenty-five ( 2 5 ) feet may be created to accommodate uses under clause (g) of subsection ( 2 ) of this section; and  (ii)  Lots with a minimum area of two ( 2 ) acres may be created to accommodate public uses under clause (f) of subsection ( 2 ) of this section.  (b)  Lots created prior to the adoption of this Bylaw, regardless of area or dimensions, may be used for any of the permitted uses of the F-G District, provided the method by which sewage is to be disposed of i s satisfactory to the Medical Health Officer.  (c)  Notwithstanding the above, where permission for a HOMESITE SEVERANCE has been granted by the British Columbia Agricultural Land Commission, the permitted area and dimensions of such HOMESITE shall be as permitted by the Commission.  BUILDINGS PER LOT: Not more than one ( 1 ) single-family dwelling, factory built unit home or mobile home shall be permitted upon a l o t , except that where the l o t exceeds twenty ( 2 0 ) acres in area, one ( 1 ) additional single-family dwelling or mobile home shall be . permitted for each ten ( 1 0 ) acres or fraction thereof of lot area in excess of twenty ( 2 0 ) acres, provided that any dwelling units in excess of two ( 2 J on any l o t shall be used solely to accommodate families engaged in agriculture on the same lot or site.  (6)  YARDS, SETBACKS: (a)  On any lot or site, a l l buildings shall be set back from the front and rear l o t lines a distance equal to the height of the building, or thirty ( 3 0 ) feet, whichever is greater, and not less than fifteen ( 1 5 ) feet from an interior or exterior site l o t line.  (b)  Notwithstanding clause (a), a l l buildings housing livestock shall be located a minimum distance of twenty-five ( 2 5 ) feet from any property line and forty ( 4 0 ) feet from any dwelling unit.  (c)  On any lot or site, commercial kennels, stables, mink farms, feedlots, piggeries, or other similar service or non-agricultural, product-based operations shall be located a minimum distance of two thousand ( 2 , 0 0 0 ) feet from any A-R District and two hundred ( 2 0 0 ) feet from the centre line of any watercourse used as a domestic water supply.  (Section 12) 0  133  (d)  The processing and packing permitted under clause (b) of subsection (2) shall be located a minimum distance of two thousand (2,000) feet from any A-R District.  (e)  In no case shall a building be located closer to a street centre line than f i f t y - f i v e (55) feet.  SITE COVERAGE: On any l o t or site, principal and accessory buildings together shall not occupy more than twenty (20) percent of the l o t or site area. HEIGHT LIMITATION: On any l o t or site, no building shall exceed a height equal to twenty-five (25) percent of the lot or site depth, or sixty (60) feet, whichever is less, except that in no case shall dwellings exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA: (a)  No dwelling unit, other than a mobile home, shall have a floor area of less than seven hundred f i f t y (750) square feet.  (b)  No mobile home shall have a floor area of less than two hundred forty (240) square feet.  SIGNS: Subject to the Motor-Vehicle Act and the regulations made thereunder: (a)  No signs or advertising displays shall be permitted other than the following: (i) (ii)  those denoting a home occupation; those denoting the name of the owner or the name or address of the property;  (iii)  those advertising the sale or rental of property;  (iv)  those advertising the sale of agricultural produce grown on the same lot or site or land of the same ownership;  (v)  public u t i l i t y and institutional signs,  provided that such signs shall not exceed six (6) square feet in area or eight (8) feet in length and shall be limited to one (1) for each street frontage upon which the lot or site abuts; (vi)  (b)  those identifying uses permitted under clause (f) of subsection (2), provided that such signs shall not exceed f i f t y (50) square feet in area, twelve (12) feet in length, or the height of the principal building on the l o t or site, or twenty (20) feet, whichever i s less, and shall be limited to one (1) for each street frontage upon which the l o t or site abuts. Necessary directional signs within the lot or site not exceeding one and onehalf (14) square feet in area shall be permitted.  Roof signs and illuminated or flashing signs shall be prohibited.  (Section 12) 0  134  (c)  A l l signs advertising the sale of seasonal produce shall be permitted only during the period between June 1 and November 15 in any year.  (d)  No sign shall project over a public right-of-way.  (11) MOBILE HOMES: (a)  No person shall locate a mobile home except on a well-drained site that is above high-water line, is at a l l times free of stagnant pools, and is graded for rapid drainage.  (b)  A l l installed mobile homes shall be restrained from moving and be securely anchored against the effect of high winds.  (c)  A l l foundations for the support of mobile homes or permissible additions shall be designed and installed in accordance with the building regulations in effect in the regulated area.  (d)  No person shall connect a mobile home to a community or municipal water system or sewage-collection system unless the mobile home has a plumbing system designed and installed according to recognized standards with a vented trap for each fixture.  (e) A l l mobile homes shall be connected to a municipal sewagecollection system, where available, or a private sewagedisposal system designed and installed in accordance with the provincial Regulations Governing Sewage Disposal, 1967, as amended. (f)  No mobile home shall be installed and occupied (i) (ii).  (iii)  i f its electrical installations f a i l to meet the requirements of the Electrical Energy Inspection Act; i f the standard of ventilation of i t s rooms is less than the requirements of the building regulations in effect in the regulated area; i f its heating installations f a i l to meet the requirements of the building regulations in effect in the regulated area.  (9) The (i)  (ii) (iii)  installation and maintenance of a l l oil-burning equipment and appliances using inflammable liquids as fuel; and the storage and disposal of inflammable liquids and o i l s ; and the installation, maintenance, carriage, and use of compressed-gas systems  shall be in accordance with the regulations of the Fire Marshal Act, 'h)  A l l additions and alterations thereof to mobile homes must be in accordance with the building and plumbing regulations in effect in the regulated area.  •i)  No additions to a mobile home shall be permitted except  (Section 12) D  135  (i)  (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)  skirtings, but only i f an easily removable access panel of a minimum width of four (4) feet provides access to the area enclosed by the skirtings; carports; shelters against sun or rain  (ramadas);  vestibules of a maximum size of thirty (30) square feet; rooms (cabanas) added to a mobile home, provided that any such added room shall have an exit or access other than through the mobile home, and, further, that any such additional room shall not be used as an exit or access to exit from any mobile home.  No additions to a mobile home shall exceed in plan area the plan area of the mobile home to which they are attached. All additions to a mobile home shall be of a modular design and shall be constructed and finished in durable, weatherresistant materials similar in quality to those used in the construction and finishing of the principal unit to which they are attached. No outdoor storage of any kind ancillary to any mobile home shall be permitted within thirty (30) feet of any l o t line. All such storage shall be effectively screened and may not be piled higher than the required screen, and such screen shall consist of a well-maintained fence or wall not exceeding eight (8) feet in height, or i t may consist of a compact evergreen hedge not less than six (6) feet in height which shall be maintained in good condition at a l l times. Such storage area shall be not more than twelve (12) feet by twenty (20) feet in area.  (Section 12) 0  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 19 0
China 14 23
New Zealand 4 0
Russia 2 0
Canada 2 0
Chile 2 0
France 1 0
Netherlands 1 0
City Views Downloads
University Park 10 0
Unknown 8 2
Beijing 7 0
Shenzhen 7 23
Ashburn 5 0
Viña del Mar 2 0
Vancouver 2 0
Mountain View 2 0
Amsterdam 1 0
Buckeye 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0096361/manifest

Comment

Related Items