— Owners say Town inconsistent in applying bylaw —
(OSOYOOS TIMES — October 4, 2006) —
Facing a second complaint that it has misled manufactured home owners in Desert Rose Estates, the Osoyoos Times has learned the Town of Osoyoos has made an offer to the owners that it hopes will resolve the conflict.
The residents are upset that the Town, after years of not enforcing its own zoning that requires a perimeter foundation for the manufactured homes, told the home owners this spring all new homes erected must also have the foundations.
After an initial complaint to Council in July, the Town said it would allow existing homes to remain without the foundation, but they would be considered legal non-conforming under the zoning rules. However, home owners told the Town they don't want that solution, because the 'non-conforming' tag could hurt property values.
In an effort to find a way out of the dilemma, the Town has now offered a compromise. In a September 12 letter to the owners, Osoyoos Planning Director Alain Cunningham says the Town will find a satisfactory zoning solution for Desert Rose Estates. But he says the Town will still require that a structural engineer review all the homes to ensure they are properly anchored. The Town and owners would split the $8,000-$10,000 total cost for the review, and owners would be responsible for any corrective work required.
At its October 2 meeting, Council read a letter from a resident complaining that he faces expenses he never anticipated because the Town hadn't been enforcing the requirement for a foundation.
Barry and Eileen Smith purchased a lot last summer and in April purchased a manufactured home to be delivered to their property. The couple claims meetings took place with Town staff and there was never a mention or discussion about zoning or perimeter foundations. But that changed on July 27, when they received a letter from the Town stating their home would have to be placed on a foundation, and they would face an additional cost.
As it stands now, the Town is asking us to spend an additional $17,000 to $22,000 for something that was not required of over half the residents of Desert Rose Estates. Personally, we cannot afford it, and we cannot afford to lose the deposit on the home, the Smiths wrote.
They say, we do not believe it is the intention of Council or its staff to admit an error and then pass on the costs of that error to innocent tax payers.rnAt Monday night's meeting, Council denied the Smiths' request for an exemption, and made no mention of the offer to find a zoning solution.
Mayor John Slater said the Town has had many discussions with planning staff regarding the issue of what is required for the homes at Desert Rose Estates, and this particular application is for a modular home that has the CSA-designation for a perimeter foundation. Mobile homes have a steel structure underneath that can be anchored and it's the advice from development services that we not permit this [exemption].rnSlater went on to say the Town told home owners in May if some of the applicants had asked for a mobile home designation on that property they could tie in to anchors, but if they ordered a modular home, it needs to be put onto a perimeter foundation, according to B.C. Building Code and our bylaw.rnIn his comments about the decision to disallow the exemption, Councillor Dick Flintoft cited safety concerns. We have no alternative but to ensure everything is safe and in good order.rnHe added the last thing the Town would want to see is for wind to blow in and knock a home down, killing or injuring people.
After the decision, several Desert Rose home owners, including Barry and Eileen Smith, gathered outside and expressed frustration at Council's decision. Keith Hooper says he feels the solution would be to change the zoning at Desert Rose Estates.
Dan Ferguson, who was in the same position as the Smiths and appealed to the Town in July, feels the strata park should be grandfathered. They've got 19 homes in there. They allowed the developer in with two show homes, which started the momentum for everyone who followed, believing a surface-mounted home was fine.rnAs to Councillor Flintoft's comments about wind and safety of surface mounted homes, Ferguson claims there has never been one blow over, ever, in the province. There's no consistency to the application of their bylaws, he adds.
The residents say the fight is not over and additional meetings to deal with the issue are being planned.
