The second storey of this proposed building would become the new headquarters for marketing firm TNI. (PeachlandNews.com file photo/Dave Preston)
by Dave Preston
A controversial parking covenant tied to a proposed downtown development was approved Wednesday morning at a special council meeting.
Occupants of a yet to be built new headquarters building for TNI The Network Inc. will be allowed to use 57 parking spots in the municipally owned parking lot across Second Street from the Peachland Legion.
In exchange, TNI will upgrade the parking lot and pay for the majority of repairs and maintenance. The agreement is for a period of up to 10 years.
Mayor Keith Fielding opened the meeting by letting the public know that he will be adding an additional step to the development approval process.
“It is clear to me from feedback that I and others have received that many people wanting to comment on the design of the TNI building have ended up feeling angry and frustrated,” said Fielding. “Angry because they have experienced the process as disrespectful and frustrated because they care about the issues but don’t feel that their opinions have been welcomed or heard.”
Fielding said he will address the problem by “establishing an additional opportunity for public input on form and character issues.”
The mayor said the additional input will be sought prior to a development permit application being dealt with, but he did not provide details how the input will work.
Fielding also told about 10 attendees of the meeting that the public would not be allowed to speak at Wednesday’s meeting. He said it is possible that if council received information from the public, a previously held public hearing could be invalidated and require repeating.
That sparked Coun. Cindy Fortin to put forward a motion to allow the public to speak at the meeting.
“I believe the public hearing is already invalid,” said Fortin.
After considerable debate, Fortin’s motion was defeated in a four to three vote. Fortin and Councillors Eldon Kerbes and Terry Condon voted in favor of allowing the public to speak at the meeting, while Fielding and Councillors Vern Moberg, Eric Hall and Peter Schierbeck voted against the motion.
“I’ve been very confused with this entire process,” said Fortin. “On one hand the public and council were told that we were debating zoning only at the public hearing and yet parking was included. On the other hand we were told that it was not. Now we’re getting more information on parking and the public was told that we would be able to address that later and now we’re not giving them a chance.”
Dave Smith, director of planning and development services, presented the parking covenant to council. He said TNI is required to provide 57 parking spaces. The covenant would allow TNI to use that many spaces in an upgraded parking lot behind its building in exchange for TNI paying for the upgrades and the majority of future maintenance.
Kerbes said the covenant goes against a section of the Sustainable Downtown Peachland Plan which calls for no surface parking in the area. He said council should establish a parking plan before proceeding with the TNI covenant.
The assessed value of the district owned lot in question is $900,000, according to Fortin, who said she thinks TNI should pay a usage fee or use on its other downtown properties for parking.
“We are in danger of looking at this issue in the short term and perhaps in isolation,” said Condon.
The covenant is a transitional step to the parking criteria laid out in the downtown plan, according to Condon. He added that council members should keep in mind that TNI employees already park downtown and with the development there won’t be an increase in the number of people requiring parking.
Fortin said she is uncomfortable with a million dollar property being used for TNI’s free parking.
Hall made a motion that would effectively put the covenant on hold while the TNI development is being built, in order to give council more time to look at other solutions.
Council would have a riot on its hands from other developers wanting the same deal — constructing a building downtown and dealing with parking later, according to Condon.
Fielding agreed, saying doing so would create a precedent.
Hall’s motion was defeated by a vote of four to three, with Kerbes, Hall and Fortin in favor.
“I know that this is very messy,” said Fielding. “We’re beginning this process with one step. There will be multiple steps.”
Fortin then made a motion to defer the subject to a later date. That was defeated by a four to three vote with Hall, Fortin and Kerbes in favor.
A final vote was taken on a staff recommendation to approve the covenant. The motion passed by a vote of four to three, with Fortin, Hall and Kerbes opposed and Fielding, Condon, Moberg and Scheirbeck in favor.
- Excited
- Informed
- Amused
- Bored
- Sad
- Angry
I guess what Ernie Hurd and a few others have been saying both here and elsewhere is that the Charette and other little inconveniences like the OCP should be followed as much as possible until such as time as a developer says “I’m not happy about this aspect of the Charette or the OCP” at which time the District Council should vote to ignore the offending aspect of the Charette or the OCP and do whatever it is the Developer wants them to do. Have I summed that up fairly accurately? It certainly seems to be what happens in practice.
Just to expand a bit on that earlier post as I submitted before I was finished …
Have any of the 3 new councillors or certain vocal members of the public actually said that they are against this particular downtown development? Not that I’m aware of but I may have missed something. I simply get the sense that they are trying to make sure that the public is not screwed in the rush to give TNI everything they want and perhaps also that previous agreements like the Charette are observed in the approval process. By all means, TNI, let’s go forward with the redevelopment. But let’s all have a look at exactly what is being proposed and whether EVERY aspect of the proposal is consistent with the Charette and Peachland’s best interest before we grant blank approval.
The other 4 members of Council don’t seem the least bit interested in this but rather are keen to approval any development without a moment’s thought given to the public’s valid concerns in these areas. It’s not the first time this has happened either.
The Edgewater has been an eyesore for 20 years. Urban Blight in Peachland yikes!!!
Someone is willing to spend millions to fix this problem. Of course the Councillors and Mayor are going to give a little for someone else to do this and expand Peachland’s tax base.
The option is for the District to step in like they did for the Primary School house and spend Millions to build buy and renovate public buildings that have no rent paying tenant, generates no tax revenue and will rely on tax payer $ to operate.
“…..without a moment’s thought given to the public’s valid concerns in these areas. It’s not the first time this has happened either.”
No, they wouldn’t listen about the curling rink, the skateboard park in Cousin’s Park, the Barrone concrete sculptures, the “Play Along ” branding and a few other things you might think of…..
I would like to see an artist’s rendering of what a building conforming to the Charette would look like.
We should also see sketches of the Waldo Way facade. I would like to see the Beach Avenue street level frontage moved back to create a covered walkway/patio in front of the stores, Would be nice on hot days and rainy days.
\
“Fielding said he will address the problem by “establishing an additional opportunity for public input on FORM and CHARACTER issues.”…That’s very nice but those are NOT the issues. The issues are, giving away a million dollar parking lot for 10 years/24hrs/day for free except they have to pave it for their own use and put lines on for same reason, thus denying ALL other downtown businesses that parking, even some that paid for it.
FORM and CHARACTER were clearly dealt with in the CHARRETTE REPORT. Just follow it!
From the Mayor’s Desk – LOCAL NEWSPAPER ARTICLE : A time to assess and to plan 7 JANUARY 2011 Each of the issues we engage include the following…
“Facilitating downtown revitalization in keeping with the principles and vision developed through the Charrette process”
The way I see this is a win win win. The town retains ownership over a prime piece of commercial property with much needed improvements at no cost, plus low maintenance. TNI gets their requirements fulfilled but not for free. The streets will bustle a little more and local businesses as well as new shops and restaurants will see additional traffic.
In future, the parking lot will be a very valuable asset. It is the perfect place for a boutique hotel with a multi-level parkade. TNI could then have the option to lease parking from the structure as part of the sale agreement (were it ever sold).
\
The mayor and 2+ term councillors have been very up front in that they were going to provide serious support to whatever company would push ahead with down-town rejuvenation.
This has been in the news and involved combining private land with municipal owned land to have a planned new downtown.
TNI honoured its portion of the deal by accumulating much of the downtown private property. Now the District is supposed to renege on their part of the deal?
There were absolutely no questions or comments or stance on the District changing its position on providing support to Private companies in the last election campaign.
None of the newly elected councillors made a single statement about downtown renovation being done with no public support. They knew that the District had committed to this but did not think it important enough to mention it when they wanted to get elected.
If they came out at election time and said no public support for private downtown revitalization they would not now be councillors and in a position to influenced by the vocal minority.
I voted for all of them and they are letting me down.
Ernie, I think you’ve missed the point of my comment and anon2′s comment and perhaps also the point of the story re the parking issue. But then again you’ve missed the point of so much in the last couple of years that really shouldn’t be a surprise should it?
Congratulations to Councillors Hall, Fortin, and Kerbes for showing some independent thinking and not simply kowtowing to the company line of the usual foursome.