Angelo and Valorie Paolera built this fountain in their backyard to help drown out some of the noise from go-carts at the neighbouring Rattlesnake Canyon amusement park. Photo by Laurena Weninger - Click on picture for larger image
OSOYOOS TIMES-January 20, 2010
By Laurena Weninger – Osoyoos Times
“I think we live on the wrong side of the bridge,” said Valorie Paolera.
Valorie and her husband Angelo are claiming the Town of Osoyoos isn’t taking a dispute in their neighbourhood regarding noise and pollution from the Rattlesnake Canyon amusement park as seriously as it has been taking some other local neighbourhood disputes.
“Why is it that what is good for one person is not good for us?” Angelo asked, referring directly to recent actions taken by Osoyoos town council to address issues between the Osoyoos Home Building Centre and its residential neighbours.
As part of a solution to that conflict, which stemmed from complaints about noise and diesel fumes, council created an idling bylaw where a $50 fine will be handed out to anyone who lets a vehicle run for longer than three minutes.
Angelo said it’s not fair that such an immediate solution was put into place in that situation, but years have gone by with no solution to his neighbourhood’s conflict with Rattlesnake Canyon.
“It’s OK for us to choke to death over here,” he said, referring directly to the 20-odd go-carts used each summer by the neighbouring amusement park.
The Paoleras have lived at 12 Willow Cres. since 1994 – and when they bought the place the Rattlesnake Canyon site was a cornfield.
The proposal to develop an amusement park there came forward a few years later and brought with it some noise.
But it was the addition of the go-carts in 2003 that caused the biggest disruption to the Paoleras’ neighbourhood.
The neighbours tried to fight the Town’s approval of the go-cart use, based on the noise and pollution the vehicles would cause.
But the council of the day allowed the business to proceed with the plan, and the fallout has been substantial.
In September, 2003, council suspended Rattlesnake Canyon’s business licence for failing to comply with the Town’s noise bylaw.
The owners ignored the suspension and the Town took them to court.
The B.C. Supreme Court ruled against the Town, calling the noise bylaw invalid.
Since then, the Town, Rattlesnake Canyon and neighbouring residents have continued to meet to discuss ways of fixing the problem.
Attempted solutions have included landscaping and other improvements to help control the noise.
But it hasn’t helped, said the Paoleras.
They said they still can’t use their backyard in the summer and the irritation carries indoors.
For example, the couple said that in the evening hours, Valorie’s rocking chair moves, due to the noise and vibrations from the go-cart track.
The owners of the park agreed to try to reduce the disturbance to neighbouring residences from the go-carts by installing foliage to dampen the noise coming from the track and sticking to a strict closing time of 11 p.m.
But it’s the pollution from the gasoline-powered small engines that has Angelo revved up, especially on the heels of the Town’s decision to forbid idling.
“They’re talking about pollution and over here we choke in the summertime.”
The complaints aren’t falling on deaf ears.
Mayor Stu Wells agrees there is pollution due to the go-carts and he sympathizes with the neighbourhood.
“They should be electrics,” he said about the best solution for the go-carts at the park. “There’s definitely a pollution issue with small gasoline motors.”
In some communities, like Los Angeles, gas-powered lawn mowers are even forbidden. While that doesn’t seem likely in the near future for Osoyoos, Wells said the folks living near the go-cart track have a legitimate complaint.
The Paoleras appeared before council in March, 2009, to again bring forward their complaints.
They received a follow-up letter, dated April 14, 2009, from Barry Romanko, the Town’s chief administrative officer.
“As you are aware, this matter was tried before the courts in 2005. After considerable costs to the taxpayers of Osoyoos, the Town lost its case against Rattlesnake Canyon,” stated the letter, adding council considered the possibility of further action against Rattlesnake Canyon in a closed meeting on April 6, 2009.
“Although council is sympathetic to your concerns with regard to noise, it was resolved unanimously that no further action will be taken against Rattlesnake Canyon at this time.”
Wells added that though the idling bylaw will help to address the conflict between the building centre and its neighbours, it wasn’t the sole reason for the creation of the bylaw.
“This is being enacted in other areas as well,” he said, pointing out the bylaw is an environmental initiative that other municipalities as well as the B.C. Ministry of Environment are pursing.
Wells also said the Rattlesnake Canyon issue has received a lot of attention.
“I think we’ve probably spent 10 times the amount of staff time on Rattlesnake Canyon as on the Home Building Centre.”
The owners of Rattlesnake Canyon declined to comment on the matter.
[email protected]
