Mayor Keith Fielding
by Dave Preston
An unusual step has been thrown into the development approval mix for one proposal by the District of Peachland.
Mayor Keith Fielding warned at a special council meeting July 4 that an additional piece of the development process would be added to the application by TNI to construct a new building on Beach Avenue.
“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,” Fielding said at the meeting. “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 an additional opportunity would be presented for public input but did not specify at the time how it would be managed.
This week, the district unveiled the new step and it goes far beyond simply letting residents submit their views.
The municipality is setting up a peer review panel of three professionals to review both the TNI application and any new public input.
Zoning for the TNI development is essentially approved, having received third reading. A controversial parking covenant that will allow the developer to use a district owned lot on Second Street has also been approved. The council appointed Advisory Planning Committee has reviewed form and character of the building.
The new, unprecedented step will involve the formation of a panel consisting of a member from the UBC Design Centre for Sustainability, a professional architect and a registered professional planner, according to the town’s website.
“Having regard for the Sustainable Downtown Peachland Plan (Charrette Report: 2010) and relevant components of the Beach Avenue Neighbourhood Plan, both part of the Official Community Plan (OCP), the Peer Review Panel will:
1. Review functional and physical design components of the concept plans for the proposed TNI building in downtown Peachland;
2. Review written comments solicited from the public on form and character design issues; and,
3. In light of such review, assist the municipality in Development Permit consideration by offering comment on form and character issues and charrette design and Beach Avenue Neighbourhood Plan interpretation,” states the website.
The panel will consider “relevant material” submitted by the public, according to the website. Only written submissions and illustrations will be accepted.
The public has until 4 p.m. on July 27 to submit their comments and the panel is to give a recommendation to council by August 15.
No information is available at this time on who the three professionals will be, what the cost of the panel will be or who will pay the cost.
- Excited
- Informed
- Amused
- Bored
- Sad
- Angry
Off topic comments have been removed. Please stay on topic.
The.Mayor, Mr Fielding said in his above mentioned column that it appears MANY people are frustrated that their opinions regarding the building haven t been listened to…etc etc…Well I get out quite a bit, talk to lots of people, and I can assure you that I haven t spoken to anyone that s against the concept as it appears in the scale diagram which has been submitted in this blog.It s a decent looking building, and serves the purpose of accommodating both business and residential needs. Who cares what the Charette report says….it s only a guideline prepared by who knows who, and from what I understand it s in no way binding.The bitching and complaining shows only one thing, and that s that no matter what s done, not everyone s going to be happy, for one reason or another. If this was an absurd looking,non functional building, Id be forefront with the few people complaining about whatever it is they re complaining about, but the fact is, it s a decent looking structure which is going to be consistent with 21 st century architecture, and it s going to improve the look of our waterfront .The fact is….only a few people are bitching about it, so let s do it…
This is the exact recommendation of the Charrette Report , paid for by the Municipality. There are many more not followed.
“Maintain the fine-grained fabric of existing parcel sizes.The existing pattern of parcel sizes in Downtown Peachland helps to create a pedestrian scale, village character. Maintain this pattern through new development by prohibiting parcel assemblies to prevent the development of large buildings that occupy multiple parcels.”
It seems like most of the people complaining have never even read the Charrette report, and the ones who have only quote things in favour of their position, which is anti-development. Let’s see how Mr. Allison’s building fits with that “Charrette report, paid for by the Municipality”. Here are some quotes from the report:
Page 46 B3 Focus commercial development on Beach Ave first
Page 46 B4 Redevelop the Edgewater Site (which by the way, is already 2 lots wide)
Page 46 B5 Locate residential units above ground-floor commercial
Page 47 B10 Build zero- and minimum-lot line developments.
Page 47: B11 Make all new buildings in Beach Ave South mixed-use
…In Beach Ave South, make all new buildings mixed-use with RESIDENTIAL and OFFICE above GROUND-FLOOR COMMERCIAL
Page 47 B13 Vary building heights between two- and three-storeys
Really! You REALLY believe the proposed new building doesn’t meet all these criteria above EXACTLY?! Some people thrive on misinformation, innuendo and outright lies. It’s sad really.
We’re overdue to improve our downtown and personally I look forward to some new shops and an increased commercial tax base in peachland given we have the highest residential tax base in BC at about 96% I believe!
Positive…Well said…:)
B.4 Redevelop the Edgewater site.
The site at Beach Avenue and Second Street, which is the current location of the Edgewater Hotel is a key location for a tourism anchor. Develop a boutique inn or small hotel on this site to bring visitors and business to Downtown Peachland. this is exact wording. Being followed?
Anything out of context can look good!
pchlnd: is that the best you’ve got left?! you of all people would know about trying to make something look good by pulling it out of context. Your earlier statement said, “This is the exact recommendation of the Charrette Report , paid for by the Municipality. There are many more not followed.” You forgot to mention all the ones that ARE folowed, and even in your latest response, you seemed to look hard for one you could try and poke at. What about the rest of those? Id love to hear your coments. And, as far as that new building being a hotel, the charrette report was a guideline. I dont see them saying where every other store should be. Those are ideas or a wish list. In the end, the free market dictates what busineses come to town. Maybe a hotel didnt want to go to that spot? Maybe you should offer to lease it for that use since you’ve got so much confidence it would work!
My last comment on this issue. Rose built a 2 storey stuccoed bldg. right next to the museum. This is the newest structure built in the downtown core. This building represents the new form and character of the downtown. With this in mind what are we discussing anyway?
So all buildings will now be stuccoed and the same colour and signage? “Form and Character” in planning terms only refers to the colour, signage material, ie. the outward appearance. It has nothing to do with the number of stories, design etc…. but you of course, would know this already!
I have no idea what you are discussing. But thanks for the comments.
I hate people that twist the meaning of certain dialogue…..There is nothing factual in his statement …purely hypothetically theoretical…….
Thanks for the grammar lesson!
I don’t know if you’ve noticed but there have been a few developments in Peachland in the last few years that have gone sideways. Trepanier Manor comes to mind, as does a smaller mess made by a developer at the end of Drought Rd, and others. Anyone opposing those at the time were labelled anti development cave dwelling terrorists, and worse.
It doesn’t hurt to question what’s happening in your community. It makes those that stand to profit, accountable. In Peachland, it seems accountability is taking a back seat, and the powers that be are really just development facilitators, hanging on to the coattails of Mr Allison.
There’s always someone running interference on behalf of TNI!
I challenge anyone to find the final Charrette report on the Municipal website.
Took less than 60 seconds.
http://www.peachland.ca/cms/wpattachments/wpID255atID569.pdf
……after reading this comment from you pchlnd about not being able to find the location of the Charette reort I now understand OMG…OMG…OMG
I found it no problem! Are you saying that the Charette report on the municipal website isn’t the final report?
The mayor says these are issues, “Review functional and physical design components”, “on form and character design issues”, “consideration by offering comment on form and character issues ” Wrong. Red herring! The issue is making deals behind closed doors on the publicly owned parking lot, (giving it away to one man, 0855150BC Ltd.)
Accepting a council vote on the issue from councillor, clearly in conflict of interest. Make all that public.
Complete disregard of the recommendations in the Charrette Report, paid for by the taxpayers and attended by community volunteers, not to mention loss of parking by many downtown businesses even as population increases.
Peachland some very high paid staff at the District who are constantly getting bailed out of doing their job.
Are they qualified to do their jobs?
If all they are really doing is filling in the forms and managing the paper-tape then they need to be getting paid clerical wages.
Why do we have to turn to outside consultants to provide information and cover for the decisions made in Peachland.
The Charette process, The economic impact report, Renewable Energy Opportunities study, along with Urban System basically managing the Water and sewer development and now this.
The value added by these studies would be vastly superseded by just gathering together $10,000 of tax payers money in $20 bills and dropping them from a helicopter over Rotary park on the first Monday of the month.
It would probably be cheaper as well.
What a waste of time; this is a waste of taxpayer money and its a waste of the developers money. We’ve all heard the comments of the 7 or 8 people who are so violently opposed. We’ve heard them over and over again. Duly noted. Thank you. Got the message. Thank you for wasting our time and money so you can once again share your opinion.
Well M Dyck. I am sure if you were opposed to the TNI project you would no doubt expect your Rights and Freedoms to be respected. Whoever the 7 or 8 are, Think, Is it not their Right also.
Those people who were critical of certain aspects of this project, including the particular design chosen in light of its being seen to disregard the Charrette report, and who were criticized as being anti-development when that was not necessarily the case, including notably by one former Councillor, can now feel vindicated for the stand they have taken.
of its being seen to disregard the Charrette report….Mike have you read the report. The report is a non binding collection of visions by non professional individuals like myself and 53 others ( less than 2% of eligible voters )who submitted their vision of individuality which in the end was collected,digested and spit out in an orderly report by a group of professional individuals. This group seem to have this Mayor all wrapped up….oh yea he was part of that group wasn’t he…allegiances die hard. This group is nothing more than a self indulged bunch of quacks……
The Charrette Report is a concept…the ideas are just that; ideas. I don’t really think many of these concepts will come to be realized. I read the Charette Report…and Wally’s Way? A side street of shops & boutiques? We really need to build something useful to fill the Beach Ave. space with people, and a business like TNI is a good start. His use of the building;…shops on the bottom, office space in the middle, living space above, is good. I believe that is exactly like written in the Charette for ‘use’ on that block. The exterior is a great balance between old & new…it has a few peaked roofs & pergolas…I can imagine it with planters out side on all levels…perhaps patios outside on the lower level. It resembles the shopping mall in Carmel, the same details on the roof peaks. I think I’ll be submitting my comments for July 27th too.
…..I thought it was Waldo way after Mayor George Waldo…..huh!
Sorry I did mean to say “waldo way” ;( …although I do like the sound of wally’s way.
Trigger – you’re bang on… the building is exactly what is called for in that block by the Charrette report. Nice one for actually reading it