Skip to content

Lot L zoning not approved yet

Sechelt Council

The Lot L rezoning was up for approval at the Sept. 17 Sechelt council meeting, but was removed before councillors could vote on it.

Chief of innovation and growth Ron Buchhorn said it needed to be updated before approval.

“Although I am confident that councillors who voted in favour of the bylaws that consider the official community plan amendment bylaw in conjunction to the liquid waste management plan and financial plan, we failed in the staff report to explicitly reference this consideration. So I’ll be asking the director of planning to bring back a staff report at the Oct. 1 meeting specifically addressing the fact that council did consider and staff did consider the impact to the liquid waste management plan and the financial plan in their consideration of this OCP amendment,” Buchhorn said.

Although rezoning approval was removed from the agenda, councillors discussed the option of subdividing and selling off some or all of Lot L when a staff report on disposition of the land came forward.

Originally council was considering splitting the lot in half with one side being used for the new public works building and one side being sold as industrial lots, but director of planning Ray Parfitt said staff is now considering splitting the property four ways.

“What we’re looking at now is the possibility of a four-lot subdivision if you sever those two half lots further in half and get four lots with frontage on Allan Road and Dusty Road. This is what we think would give the District the best bang for its buck,” Parfitt said.

The staff report showed the gross revenue for the District from selling all four sites on Lot L could be up to $1.2 million, minus the $193,500 estimated to get the sites ready.

Buchhorn noted the public works building could move somewhere else, enabling all four lots to be sold.

“Part of the reason for looking at the four lots is we’re still looking at how much space do we need for the public works building, are there other alternatives for the public works building that might be a better fit. So this gives us options,” he said.

“We can keep half the lot for public works, we can keep a quarter of the lot for the public works. If another option came up for public works, you know, this is a source of revenue that we could use for the visitor information centre, the public works building, other assets that the community could enjoy more so than an isolated piece of land that really doesn’t fit the strategic value for the community.”

Coun. Alice Lutes said in response that she didn’t see a need to rush into subdivision or rezoning if the District wasn’t sure what they were going to do with Lot L.

“Why are we in such a hurry to subdivide and possibly sell this property when there are so many things in the air undecided upon? I think that we are just rushing ahead when it isn’t appropriate,” Lutes said.

Buchhorn said the District has already had three inquiries about the property including former owner Mike Anderchek, a medicinal marijuana producer and Sechelt Innovations Ltd., which has identified the area for a food processing and packaging facility.  

“I’m not in a hurry but I’d love to see us generate some revenue from this piece of property that I don’t see another use for in terms of the community,” Buchhorn said.

In the end council moved that staff prepare a report about the potential “costing and servicing” of a four lot subdivision, which is expected to come back to the next council meeting.

Councillors Lutes and Mike Shanks were against the motion.