Kimberley boundary expansion - Vote No Flyer

During the coming Municipal Election, citizens of Kimberley will be asked to vote in a referendum. 

This referendum is a critical defining moment for Kimberley: its outcome will determine whether the City approves significant expansion of its municipal boundaries to allow two major housing developments (one on Concentrator Hill known as Taylor’s Mill, and one between Upper Summer Sub and Morrison Sub) to proceed.

While Wildsight is not opposed to development and fully supports the need to build our local economy responsibly, it is very concerned about these proposed boundary expansions.  

This information has been developed to promote community discussion, and to address unbalanced claims made by the proponents of the proposed developments.

(1) Doesn’t Kimberley need this expansion?
   
Not really. Within our current City boundaries there is already enough land zoned for residential development to allow for 3000 new homes — enough to double Kimberley’s current population.  The City does not need to expand its boundaries to grow.

(2) What about Kimberley’s water supply?  Can it handle these new needs?

Wildsight has just completed an eighteen-month study of Kimberley’s water supply, analyzing historic flows in Mark Creek and determining the requirements to meet growing human needs while maintaining a healthy ecosystem.  The data suggests that Kimberley can anticipate significant stresses on the water system in low flow years if the proposed developments proceed.  These two boundary expansions could lead to expensive infrastructure upgrades (to bring water in from Matthew Creek) and potential water metering for current citizens.

(3) I’ve heard that allowing Taylor’s Mill will prevent feedlot construction close to town.

The proponents of Taylor’s Mill have threatened the City and our citizens.  They warn that if the proposed development is not approved, a feedlot or gravel pit may be built in its place. On the doorstep of Kimberley?!

First, the RDEK (where the land currently lies) has always consulted with local municipalities before approving controversial developments near their boundaries.  It is difficult to imagine that the very active citizens of Kimberley would allow a truly unwanted development close to town.

Secondly, making threats like this is an appalling way to conduct business and no way to treat Kimberley citizens and council.


(4) Is Taylor’s Mill a “green development”?

No.  True green development is designed to expand a community’s ecological footprint as little as possible.  It tends to be higher density, utilizes existing lands within a community, and locates close to services to minimize new infrastructure and associated costs.

Taylor’s Mill sprawls outward from town, is very low density with huge lots, requires considerable new infrastructure, and will be automobile dependent.  It is definitely not a “green development”.  The proponent predicts that 60% of the houses will be second homes for non-residents, resulting in significant climate change impacts as these owners heat two homes all winter and commute between them.

(5) What about the seniors and low cost housing that Taylor’s Mill promises?

This is a great part of their plan.  But lands already exist within the Municipal boundary, currently zoned and permitted to provide 3000 new housing units — including those for seniors and low cost.  In addition the City will be actively encouraging secondary suites in existing neighbourhoods and subdivision of large lots to provide more affordable housing.  We don’t need to expand our boundaries to provide these necessary housing options.

(6) Won’t the expansion provide many new jobs for locals?

Taylor’s Mill has placed an economic analysis on their website with some amazing numbers for job creation; however, history shows that grandiose claims by developers rarely grow into reality.  Forest Crowne — which only ten years ago was similarly touted as a critical saviour for Kimberley — is a case in point.
 
It is also worth noting that developing the lands already within the City boundaries will also produce jobs for our local citizens.

(7) Won’t the new developments provide a big boost in tax revenue for the City?

Taylor’s Mill proponents promise a significant increase in tax revenues flowing to the City. The revenue projections seem very optimistic, especially in light of the challenges facing global markets, and their claims are impossible to substantiate.

Low density residential development (such as that proposed at Taylor’s Mill) is the least efficient source of tax revenue to help a City run its overall operations, especially when compared to industrial or commercial development.

Worse still, the proponent’s economic analysis does not include the medium and long term costs to the City of maintaining new infrastructure and providing services to new residents.  As the City grows, new staff needs to be hired, more roads need to be plowed, policing costs rise, sports facilities need to be maintained, etc., etc. One thing is for sure, the net tax benefit to the City will be considerably less than the proponent is predicting.

If you have any further questions regarding the boundary expansion, please contact Wildsight at kimcran@wildsight.ca or 250-427-2535.