Last week’s Summerland Review carried an article titled “Number of Infill Sites Disputed.” 1,401 is the number of potential lots and multi-family units available in the serviced area and the potential in non-ALR land. The number of lots is available in appendix 4 of the final Summerland Urban Growth Strategy report Nov. 15, 2013, page 77.
The numbers of units for multi-family are taken from the servicing costs report in the tables at the back of the “Index Map showing Potential Growth Areas” report. These numbers were supplied to the consultants by the District of Summerland’s own Planning and Economic Development staff.
The final Urban Growth Strategy Report states that there are 280 potential infill lots in the serviced area.
Also there are 322 potential lots in the Deer Ridge, Deer Ridge Cartwright, and Deer Ridge east areas. The report also states that there are 350 potential lots and infill lots in the Hespeler Road, Hunter’s Hill, Mayne Street, Switchback Road and Victoria Road South areas.
The potential multi-family total from the servicing cost report gives a total of 319 units.
To be added to these numbers are the 130 existing fully serviced lots.
Apparently due to slow market conditions only about 16 of these are currently for sale. This brings the total to 1,401.
This translates to 50 years of growth at 28 units per year which is the average over 16 years from 1997 to 2012.
This is the average used in the servicing costs report. I do understand that development costs and other circumstances could reduce this number.
If the total was ultimately less than 1,000 this could still provide approximately 30 to 35 years of growth.
In addition there are 50 to 60 newer and older homes constantly for sale in town. Residential need is driven by economic growth not the other way around.
Given even reduced numbers, I would ask why pursue this plan.
We have substantial growth potential without touching good flat ALR agricultural land.
A number of “what if” scenarios have been developed by staff since the February 11 council meeting. These numbers are strictly “what if” scenarios.
The only numbers that I or the public for that matter, can go by are the numbers presented in the final report and the cost of servicing report.
I had absolutely not intended to bring my comments to the press, and have kept my comments to the council table. But, I decided I must defend the integrity of my comments and provide justification of the numbers.
Coun. Peter Waterman