Trustee Falck Summary of Community Consultation Workshops

Extracted text (beginning)

Why want to keep (WHAT)Conserns (WHAT)Proposed solutions (HOW)Environment (WHY)Privacy/rural character (WHY)   Rationale/how solution addresses problem (WHY)Needs further clarification (Dag)
Prevent build on foreshoreKeep 122protects foreshore moreN/APrevents buildings nearer foreshore, helping to further 
protect it.
How does this compare with trees cut on forshore to open view?  Is 
it more or less damaging to environment?  Need some statement to 
how this is evaluated.
Increases privacy Keep as isIncreases privacy from/to water 
perspective and is morerural in 
character.
Maintains rural character by having untouched foreshore 
and increases privacy from water traffic for residents.
If current setbacks are desired because it creates a "rural character 
and more private situation", is a personal opinion.  We may want to 
gather more info on how many hold this view.
Can create need for more 
tree cutting
Reduce setback to 114 level   If there are trees in front of a further set 
back building site, they may need to be 
cut down for views.
Creates corridors in forestCould increase clearings for both house site and view instead 
of only for house site
An example of a situation were this were the case should be 
explained to show if more natural undisturbed area was disrupted 
by the larger setback of 122.
Prevent flooding of 
building
Keep 122Sea-level rising could cause house built too close to shore to 
be flooded/washed away.
This depends on the shoreline slope.  Should there be a slope 
component of the setback?
Shore armoringKeep 122Shore amouringDifferent discussion
Keep 122Setbacks according to 122 means they cross /overlap in the 
middle of my house.
What does this result in? E.g. if build new today, would there be 
other options for build site?  Are there some lots that would not 
have a viable building site without a variance to current 122?  
Too prescriptive, not 
allowing individual 
situations to be appraised 
based on their merit.
Change 122 back to what was, and 
look for ways to have each case 
evaluated by professional
Privacy/overreachToo many factors individual for each situation.  Should not 
have one number for size of setbacks.  Should be established 
by professional.
What would be involved in "professional" approval?  Need to 
understand what mechanism is suggested to achieve?.
??BOV should be used instead of 
Trustees 
Board of Variance (BOV) should be used instead of 
Development Variance Permits (DVP) being decided by 
Trustees.  
How would this change things?  Would it be more fair? Cost less? 
take less time?
To uniform, not fit for all 
situations.
Apply different setbacks for 
different property types/size etc. 
or exclude 122 from some 
property types.
One size does not fit all.  Alternative solution (instead of 
Variance) could be to Exclude some areas from 122, and let it 
apply to others where it makes sense. E.g. Boundry Pass.  E.g. 
Long narrow lots most affected, reducing options for building 
site.
If there i

First 3,000 characters. Open the original for the whole document.