EAST PORPOISE BAY RATE PAYERS ASSOCIATION

PO BOX 1886  Sechelt  BC V0N 3A0

July 7, 2006

District of Sechelt

Attention:  Ray Parfitt, Director of Planning

P.O. Box 129,

Sechelt, B.C.

V0N 3A0

Dear Mr. Parfitt,

Re:  Silverback  Development  Re-zoning Application Revision (June 2006)

The board of the East Porpoise Bay Rate Payers Association met on July 6, 2006 and discussed the changes made to the above application.

We are very dissapointed that the District of Sechelt did not send out a copy of the Re-zoning Application Revision, possibly as an update to the Referral Form.  In a round-about way we learned that a revision had come in and we requested a copy.  In future we would appreciate being informed, in a timely manner, of all zoning correspondence regarding Silverback.

Our Association and Sandy Hook Community Association have jointly written a letter documenting our concerns and questions.  A copy is attached.

In addition our Board reviewed the Application and our neighbourhood concerns are listed below:

Road Access

Sechelt Inlet Road is narrow and we have been told there is no room for bike lanes and pedestrian traffic.  How will the increased traffic be accommodated?  Has the District of Sechelt done their own traffic study of the area?  Could a traffic study, with a counter, be placed on Sechelt Inlet Road during a busy summer month?

Could the mentioned bike path be extended through to Wharf Road?

Community Character

The development is identified as a “residential/recreational golf course community” and a “resort community, or seaside village”.  All multiple family units of three or more may be incorporated into a rental pool. Would this allow for time-shares and short-term rentals?  Will the guidelines be a part of the Re-zoning?

Page 2

Management and Governance

What is the relationship between the developer and the companies contracting their services?  What happens in the event the corporate contractor fails in the supply of management of their services?  Will there be a single community association acting as a strata council, or will there be numerous associations within the development? 

Public Information and Input 

We request a public meeting, or meetings, to allow for questions and answers in a public forum.  This is further detailed in our joint letter with Sandy Hook.

East Porpoise Bay Neighbourhood Plan – Schedule 5 to Bylaw 435, 2003

(pages mentioned will be attached with points highlighted)

As the document mentions “The Terraces” with approximately 727 residences, etc. does the District of Sechelt plan to meet with our Association to make changes to the Plan and the above-mentioned Bylaw?

Page 3 & 4    2.13 Policies

· the suburban character of the neighbourhood shall be preserved by sensitive site planning and landscape treatment

· where possible residential development shall preserve view

corridors and site lines to Porpoise Bay, by height restrictions and building separation

· high density residential development shall be subject to the

provision of approved services and shall be subject to the

Development Permit Guidelines for multi family housing. 

Residential densities shall be as follows:

- Two family Residential – maximum density of 30 units/hectare

- Townhouses              - maximum density of 40 units per hectare

- Apartments               - maximum density of 50 units per hectare

· Question –  Do the densities on the Application meet these guidelines?

Page 8           2.7  Comprehensive Residential Golf Course Development

                               Area

· we realize the number of units and the amenities have changed

· we wish to have the District of Sechelt ensure that our Neighbourhood Plan criteria is met in the Application

· in particular we wish to point out section (2)

b) include affordable housing which is well integrated

                                        into the overall development and phasing, and is not

Page 3.

                                        physically isolated;

                                    e) incorporate roads and cycle/pathways which function as

                                        logical extensions of the existing network

 j) provide for recreational and play facilities, appropriate

    to the size and nature of the development

· Question – the affordable housing does not meet our Neighbourhood Plan objectives.  Why is the land for affordable housing physically isolated rather than being integrated into the overall development and phasing?

Why is the developer only giving back approximately 1% of the land, rather than a larger percentage?

· Question – In the application, section 2.6, there is mention of site 12 being developed for recreational use for the residents of Silverback and the Sechelt public.  The recreation uses could include a soccer field, etc.  At what phase of the development would site 12 be developed?

Page 11         3.2 Transit Service

· Council shall encourage the Sunshine Coast Regional District to provide transit services to the East Porpoise Bay neighbourhood.  In particular, the provision of Public Transit shall be integrated with future development

· Question – Has any consideration been given to providing future transit service to our area, and when?

Page 14         4.0 Environment

· We trust the District of Sechelt will ensure the environment is

protected under the District of Sechelt Official Community

Plan guidelines

· Please refer to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Guidelines for Shannon Creek – Study  of February 2006, Referral File #05-HPAC-PA2-000-000122, Referral

Title – Silverback Golf Course- Porpoise Bay Developments

Page 16         6.0 Waterfront Objectives

· Waterfront public amenities and public access shall be provided by developers as a condition of land development and redevelopment of properties bordering Porpoise Bay

Page 32         7.72 Development Permit Application Requirements

· Prior to issuing a development permit, Council required applicants to furnish, at their expense, a Development Permit application which shall include:

e) Reports by a registered Professional Engineer (as

    highlighted)

f) An environmental impact statement (as highlighted)

Page 4.

· Question – have these reports and statements been provided to the District of Sechelt, and have they been accepted and approved?  If not, will they be required?

Thank you for your attention to these matters as they directly concern our East Porpoise Bay Neighbourhood Plan.  We look forward to a reply at your earliest convenience.

Yours truly,

Lorraine Gallant

President

East Porpoise Bay Ratepayers Association

c.c. Mayor Cam Reid and Council