RV Resort Approved    LUC Update    Lacoma Lake 
 

 

RDCO records show about 85 properties that are in Trepanier, and in the Electoral Area.  This  number excludes several large surveyed parcels that are owned by the Crown, and smaller parcels held by the Highways ministry around the interchange.


Maxwell Road Update - Trepanier Town Hall Meeting May 14th, 2009, Peachland Community Centre 7:00 - 10:00 pm

 

 

Q&A - Jim Edgson to Ministry of Transportation

Thank you for asking for a clarification concerning the issue of Maxwell Road.  As you realize, while Maxwell Road is the current domain of the Ministry of Transportation, the Maxwell Road issue is of concern to me because,



1): People in Trepanier have expressed a concern;
 
2): I have driven the road several times and certainly can see that it would be preferable to improve access and egress from above;
 
3): There have been many possibilities communicated to me on how to fix the problem.  To this end I had committed to find out all the facts and information first from the Ministry of Transportation to be able to communicate information to the residents of the Trepanier area concerning Maxwell Road.  It must also be realized that anything communicated at this time is designed to bring forward to the residents as factual information in the hopes that a community driven solution can be initiated and brought forward through the appropriate Provincial Agencies.
 
To this end, a meeting was held with Jeff Wiseman and Chris Keir of the MoT at Trepanier recently.  They were very familiar with the Maxwell Road and the ancillary issues.  We all travelled the "road over the top" and frankly discussed what MoT would and would prefer not to do concerning Maxwell Road.  Upon the request of Jeff, I formulated some questions to which he provided me some very clear answers:
 
Question 1:
While the road "over the top" could be built by the MoT, is it a priority for the MoT at the present time?

 
MoT Answer: "Construction of a new road is not being considered.  A new road in this location, roughly paralleling the hydro transmission line, will eventually be built through development of the lands adjacent to that route to service that development." (I will be prepared to discuss what this means at the Town Hall)
 
Question 2:
Is the improvement of the existing Maxwell Road to a relatively full road a priority for the MoT at the present time?
 

MoT Answer: "Improvement of the existing Maxwell Road is included in the ministries multi year rehabilitation plan. When ranked against the other competing priorities in the district it is a low priority. The reason for it being a low priority is because the road has low traffic volumes and the cost to improve the road is considerable. Significant property acquisition is required along with the construction of substantial retaining walls to increase road width and improve alignment."

Question 3:
If there is some priority on either or both of these roads, would one be preferable to the other at the present time?

MoT Answer: "Improvement of the existing Maxwell Road alignment would be preferable."

Question 4:
The current Maxwell Road has private property on both sides of it.  If the MoT was offered a partnership with the owner or owners of the adjacent properties leading to an improved road base for the existing Maxwell Road, would a): the MoT consider it; and b): would this increase the priority level for improvement of the existing Maxwell Road?

MoT Answer: "The ministry often enters into partnering agreements with outside parties, only if a mutually beneficial agreement can be reached. Road improvement projects are often given higher priority where road improvement costs can be substantially reduced through a partnering agreement."

I will be prepared to discuss these questions and answers at the Town Hall I am planning mid-May.  If you wish to put this out to the people of Trepanier for them to think about prior the meeting, please do so.  It is constantly my desire to factually look completely as I can at an issue and discuss it with the affected residents of Central Okanagan West.  I am looking forward to hearing how people in Trepanier see things going from here concerning Maxwell Road.

Jim Edgson - Regional Director Central Okanagan West
jim.edgson@cord.bc.ca
Ph: 250-212-7296


Subject: Maxwell Road Improvement                 View Maxwell Model
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:52:26 -0700

To: Jim Edgson jim.edgson@cord.bc.ca , Jeff.Wiseman@gov.bc.ca 


Hello Jim and Jeff......good evening to you from Trepanier. We're happy to submit the following proposal regarding Maxwell Road improvements.

Assuming we can agree on a mutually beneficial design for improving Maxwell Road, we, Jack Creek Ranch LTD - Property Owners, Maxwell Road, Peachland:

  • Are prepared to work with the Ministry of Transportation to improve Maxwell Road and bring it up to specification.

  • Are prepared to provide the necessary road right-of-way on Maxwell Road.

  • Are prepared to supply raw materials needed to construct Maxwell Road.

  • Are prepared to agree that no gravel processing will occur on site.

Looking forward to the opportunity to participate in a partnering agreement.

Respectfully,

Jack Creek Ranch LTD.


Trepanier residents asked to design and build dam on Lacoma Lake.......
 ( read the letter from Jane Bender Ministry of Environment)


THE PEACHLAND VIEW  - February 26th, 2009.

 

IHA pushes for collaboration with area municipalities

By Dave Preston

 

The greatest contributions to the improvement of health for citizens have been made not by the healthcare industry, but by local governments, and those in charge of citizens’ health need to start working closer with municipalities like they did years ago, according to Interior Health Authority’s medical health officer.

 

“It is the encouragement of civic communities, supporting healthy lifestyles, ensuring safe roads and housing, good drinking water and proper sanitary services that has resulted in most of the improvement in health status that we have enjoyed over the past century,” Dr. Paul Hasselback said in a presentation to council Tuesday.

 

Public health bodies were born from municipal structures and fostered close relationships between the two, said Hasselback.

 

In every province except Ontario, the formation of Regional Health Authorities has severed the close relationships and new staff, council members and structures, “….have obliterated the importance of maintaining the close linkages between local government and public health units,: said Hasselback.

 

Interior Health now deals with 10 regional districts, 52 municipal governments, 54 First Nations and 16 school boards, Hasselback said.

 

“It behooves us, in Interior Health, to step forward to work towards re-building the relationships since we share a mutual objective of improving the wellbeing of the same citizens that we serve,” said Hasselback.

 

IHA looks after 70 pieces of legislation involving public health and has recently started working with several local jurisdictions that are referring various plans to the health authority, which looks at them from a healthy living perspective.

 

Hasselback encouraged council to foge an alliance with IHA and re-establish the municipality’s role in public health.  He suggested major developments and Official Community Plan amendments should be referred to the health authority for input.

 

IHA inherited responsibility for nearly half the province’s drinking water systems but nearly 80 percent of the systems in need of significant infrastructure improvements, said Hasselback.

 

Peachland is commended for its proactive work in providing water to the Edgewater Pines Mobile Home Park but the district should also look at improvements for the Antlers Beach and Hardy Falls’ water systems and even consider helping the Trepanier Ditch Users, who fall outside the district boundaries, said Hasselback.

 

Coun. Terry Condon said small jurisdictions will find it very expensive to provide water consistent with Canadian Drinking Water Standards.

 

“You are running a risk here,” Hasselback said of Peachland’s untreated water.  He said municipalities have to recognize the liability of providing drinking water given what has happened in places like Walkerton, Ontario and North Battleford, Saskatchewan.

 

Hasselback said IHA does not always get referrals from the Ministry of Mines about gravel pits and Peachland could certainly forward applications to the health authority for comment.


Trepanier residents asked to design and build dam on Lacoma Lake
read the letter from Jane Bender  (Ministry of Environment)


 

Trepanier residents call for end to land-use restrictions

By Jason Luciw - Kelowna Capital News

Published: January 27, 2009 10:00 PM
Updated: January 28, 2009 12:34 AM A 14-year old land-use policy is restrictive, outdated and it’s time for it to go, according to some residents living just southwest of West Kelowna’s boundaries.

The land-use policy imposes contracts that limit the types of uses allowed on a few dozen rural properties located in Trepanier Valley.

Area resident Rusty Ensign said the policy dates back to 1995. And since then, on and off ramps to the Okanagan Connector were built, making the area far more accessible. Therefore, the restrictions imposed no longer make as much sense, he stated.

Ensign said the time has come for an official community plan to be created instead, to govern land uses in the rural neighbourhood, just as an OCP would be used to regulate growth in other developable areas.

Ensign said he received a letter two years ago from a former director of planning at the Central Okanagan Regional District, who stated an official community plan would be coming soon. Given all the land use applications in the area, three in the last year alone, it’s time the regional district woke up to the fact an official community plan is needed, said Ensign.

Ensign is currently attempting to remove the land use contracts from his three properties in the area. He is attempting to rezone one lot and change the boundaries on the other two.

Meanwhile, planner Ron Fralick agreed that Trepanier Valley needed its own official community plan. It’s one of three areas in the regional district in need of an OCP, the planner mentioned. The other two are on the east side of the lake in the June Springs and Lakeshore Road South areas, explained Fralick.

The costs of completing the official community plans will be included in the regional district’s upcoming budget, according to development services director Dan Plamondon.

A report on the matter is due to go to the board on February 23. Then, the budget should be passed by March 31, hopefully setting the stage for the OCP process to get underway.

Meanwhile, residents are waiting to hear more about what the regional district will do in the way of providing fire protection for the Trepanier Valley.  ....read more

“If you don’t get it together and provide some fire protection, we are thinking of doing it ourselves,” said a resident in attendance at the meeting.

jluciw@kelownacapnews.com


Highlights of the Regional Board Meeting– October 27, 2008

RV Resort Rezoning Approved

The Regional Board has adopted a rezoning application bylaw for a proposed Recreational Vehicle Resort. The rezoning will see the C8 Wilderness Resort Commercial land use designation to permit development of approximately 120 sites for RV’s along with common areas and a tourist lodge/clubhouse on a 12-hectare parcel adjacent to Paradise Valley Drive and the Okanagan Connector Highway 97-C in the Central Okanagan West Electoral Area.


The Regional Board approved the Brent Road Sewer and the
Trepanier Fire Protection Feasibility Studies
.

Jim Edgson  http://www.edgson.ca/archives.htm#November_2008

Peachland Fire / Rescue, proudly serving Peachland, British Columbia    West Kelowna Fire / Rescue, proudly serving the District of West Kelowna, British Columbia
 


Residents - FYI - Road Name Confusion

According to Lynda Lochhead - District Development Technician with MoT

It is Trepanier Road not Trepanier Bench Road.
Upton Road ends at the Peachland municipal boundary.
It is Paradise Valley Drive
not Paradise Valley Road.


Is it MacKinnon or McKinnon Road???


   Click for Old News and Archives


Back