Downzoning Princeton Ave.

A motion to change zoning regulations to reduce building heights and densities in the Princeton Avenue area is a reasonable idea, but should be checked with a lawyer first, Peachland councillors decided on Tuesday.

Coun. Rick Ingram’s motion proposed to amend a common medium-density zone specifically in the Princeton area.

When planning staff suggested the motion could be considered next year during an official community plan review, Ingram pushed back to have it passed immediately. And he had some support.

“A five-storey building is not appropriate anywhere in there,” Ingram said with a little passion in his voice.

“The residents in this area don’t want that height and they don’t want that many homes and so I think we should act on that and act accordingly,” added Coun. Randey Brophy.

Ingram argued his motion isn’t anti-development.

“Yes this would represent a downzoning, but it represents a downzoning from a zoning that is completely inappropriate for the area. That zoning shouldn’t exist in the first place," he said.

“To downzone it is not discouraging development, it’s encouraging appropriate development,” he said. “And to say that a developer’s come back and agreed to a covenant and they’re giving us something, they’re not, they’re just getting closer to what’s appropriate in that neighbourhood.”

Planning director Darin Schaal said the motion would be better dealt with as part of an official community plan review, scheduled for next year. “This is premature,” he said, in response to a question from Coun. Alena Glasman.

Coun. David Collins asked whether a change to the zoning language would affect applications now in the system, suggesting a legal opinion might be needed. Council heard one developer had expressed concern about the motion.

“Have we addressed the legal implications of such a decision. I probably want to hear from our district lawyer on what we’re getting ourselves into if we pass this motion,” said Collins.

“We might be rushing this without our ducks in a row to pass this motion tonight,” he said.

“I’m not disagreeing with the spirit of it because I think that RM-4 as it currently is doesn’t work on a lot of the hillside parcels, Collins added.

Council voted 4-3 to defer the motion for two weeks to get legal advice.