Skip to main content
File #: BL 12-047    Version: Name: Bylaw 30-2012
Type: Bylaw Status: Defeated
File created: 8/16/2012 In control: Legislative Matters
On agenda: 10/23/2012 Final action: 10/23/2012
Title: PUBLIC HEARING - (9:30 a.m. - RECONVENED from October 9, 2013) Bylaw No. 30-2012 Proposed Amendment to Land Use Bylaw No. 20-2009 to rezone Pt. NE-09-53-01-W5M at Hubbles Lake from CR District to BRR and PC Districts. Proposed Motions 1) That Bylaw No. 30-2012 receive second reading. 2) That Bylaw No. 30-2012 receive third and final reading.
Attachments: 1. Chair's Notes, 2. List of Speakers, 3. Written Comments, 4. Amended Proposed Redistrictng Map, 5. Administration Report, 6. Biologist Supplementary Letter, 7. Options 1 and 2 Biologist Supplementary Letter, 8. Bylaw 30-2012, 9. Schedule A, 10. Keyplan, 11. Outline Plan, 12. Conceptual Servicing Design Brief, 13. Floodplain Analysis, 14. Floodplain and 30.0 Metre Buffer, 15. Biophysical Assessment, 16. Biophysical Assessment Appendix B Photographs, 17. Traffic Impact Assessment, 18. Geotechnical, 19. Groundwater Well and Aquifer Assessment
Title
PUBLIC HEARING - (9:30 a.m. - RECONVENED from October 9, 2013)

Bylaw No. 30-2012 Proposed Amendment to Land Use Bylaw No. 20-2009 to rezone Pt. NE-09-53-01-W5M at Hubbles Lake from CR District to BRR and PC Districts.

Proposed Motions
1) That Bylaw No. 30-2012 receive second reading.
2) That Bylaw No. 30-2012 receive third and final reading.

Body
Administration Recommendations
Administration continues to support Bylaw 30-2012 and recommends that Council give second and third reading to the Bylaw.

Purpose
The developer wishes to re-develop the former Allan Beach campground into a Bareland Recreational Resort.
Reconvened October 23, 2012 Summary
Council recessed the October 9, 2012 Public Hearing requesting clarification from the County's Solicitors regarding the possibility of liability related to a decision that Council may render regarding this redistricting application. The Solicitor's comments are summarized in the following two paragraphs and appear to adequately address the questions raised by Council on October 9th. Further, per Council direction, Administration is not furthering any further public comments regarding this Public Hearing that were received after the original Hearing recessed October 9.

The County's Solicitor notes that when Council is making a decision on a redistricting, Council is generally making a decision that is more administrative/policy in nature. Council has an obligation to hold a public hearing and come to the hearing with an open mind, capable of persuasion. Council needs to hear all the evidence and argument presented at the hearing and then make a decision based on that information. Provided there is some relevant evidence to support the decision, Council's decision will be "lawful", that is, resistant to challenge on appeal or judicial review. Where a decision is at the administrative/policy end of the spectrum, the standard on judicial review is reasonableness; the Court will not disturb the deci...

Click here for full text