Lake Country Results

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

Already have and continue to do so.

No explanation provided.

I believe that a whole community should provide all types of housing options.

No explanation provided.

We have just done a new OCP that's Urban Containment Boundary includes all land not in the ALR that has sewer and water. We have included two large unserviced areas for possible inclusion if the services can be brought there. Otherwise we have a lot of land available for single family, ground orientated development right now.

We have just updated and made sure our policies are fair to all, new residents and old. WE will continue to review regularly to make sur that fairness and affordability are always considered

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

Construction has been my family's economic backbone since before I was born. I've worked this industry as a labourer, manager, and owner, sat on leadership teams within it, and have friends and family in the trades here. This is personal for me, not just policy.

With Kelowna's unemployment at 9.3% in July, and reduced construction activity named a key driver, this is a jobs issue for the whole region.

My focus is on what Council controls:

1. Faster, more predictable permit and development engineering turnaround times

2. Growth that follows our OCP and doesn't outpace our roads, water, and sewer capacity

This isn't about rubber-stamping growth.

I've been vocal about pushing back where provincial mandates override local judgment on what gets built and where. And we need to enable qualified local builders to build, keeping our construction workforce employed.

Infrastructure is the foundation everything else is built on. Roads, water, and community facilities are what keep growth and private investment happening. I support development that works with our current infrastructure investments.

Development leads growth, we need to make sure its planned in a way so that we are not scrambling to catch up after the fact.

Tough one to answer honestly. Lake Country is becoming an urban centre while still running on rural infrastructure. Without growth paying its share, the cost falls on existing residents instead.

The District's recent DCC update reflects that: development funding the infrastructure it needs.

I can't promise to cut rates and leave us short on capacity.

What I can commit to is in supporting the province's new DCC payment flexibility, so builders aren't carrying costs upfront, pushing for faster, more predictable permitting, and keeping rates under constant review so they track real need, not budget convenience.

Absolutely I support streamlining. Builders shouldn't be stuck waiting on process.

But with 547 units approved between April and June 2026, up 670% from the year before, and over 100 more than Penticton, raises a fair question: was that growth paced with our OCP and our infrastructure capacity in mind, or did volume outrun planning?

I want a permitting process that's fast and disciplined. One that doesn't force developers to wait needlessly, but also doesn't approve growth faster than our roads, water, and sewer systems can actually support.

Right now, I'm not convinced we've found that balance.

GST is already scrapped on new homes under $1 million as of March 2026, so focus going forward should be on the Property Transfer Tax, which still applies to resale home purchases.

Used homes shouldn't be taxed more heavily than new ones.

Zoning should enable housing, not dictate lifestyle. City Hall shouldn't prescribe specific housing types based on what made sense years ago. It should respond to what the market and residents actually need, and the future needs of the city.

I want local government to have real control over planning, it's why I push back against provincial mandates overriding our judgment. But that same principle means local zoning shouldn't swing to the other extreme and force outcomes the market can't support. Flexible, demand-responsive zoning gets people homes they can afford and actually want.

Yes, but with conditions. Ground-oriented housing on genuinely undeveloped, non-agricultural land makes more sense to me than forcing density into established neighbourhoods under provincial mandate. It respects both the character of existing communities and the preferences of families who actually want a yard, not just a unit.

That support comes with real guardrails:

1. It has to respect environmentally sensitive areas

2. It can't touch our Agricultural Land Reserve

3. It has to be paired with the infrastructure to support it. roads, water, and services planned alongside approval, not playing catch-up after the fact.

Growth that meets real demand is good for Lake Country. Growth that outpaces what our roads and services can handle isn't, no matter how it's packaged.

In its current iteration, no, I do not support extending Lake Country's growth boundary. Our infrastructure is too weak to handle that kind of expansion. Maybe in the future, but not now.

We need a Lake Country with a strong central core, with growth flowing outward from there. Extending our current boundaries now, with our outdated infrastructure, is asking for disaster.

I want to see a strong construction industry in Lake Country and the Central Okanagan. But I don't want to lose what makes Lake Country special.

Right now, approximately 90% of our tax base sits on the shoulders of our residents. I want to change that. Growth does pay for growth, but that growth can come in different forms. By increasing our industrial and commercial spaces (which we need to build), we can reduce the burden on residents, so the cost of growth that new homes pay for becomes more attainable.

Until we have a diversified tax base in Lake Country, it would unfortunately not be in the best interest of our residents to revisit that policy.

Absolutely, this is a given. As long as the housing construction is done in a responsible manner, with future Lake Country in mind

We don't control the housing market but Lake Country Council is dedicated to working with developers and builders, rather than against them, as was historically the case. We try to work together to understand where we can help. We keep an open mind and an open door to conversations to help move the needle any way we can.

Yes, yes, yes. We can protect our rural and agriculture and still have growth and economic development. One does not have to come at the expense of the other. In fact, they can even benefit each other. We're focussed on win-wins!

This is difficult but I am always open to suggestions. Our taxpayers already shoulder a burden of subsidizing agriculture. I wouldn't ask taxpayers to fund housing. But if there are creative solutions that benefit everyone, I am always excited to explore ideas.

Always. We have done so much this past term. Why stop there? If it works for people, it should work for us.

I need to know more about this to really commit.

Unfortunately, we are in a tough market right now, mostly due to the United States. That doesn't mean we should throw out solid urban planning. Should things be looked at through new lenses in an attempt to roll with the times? Always. But solid planning principles have to be key to OCPs and long-range plans.

I don't live in Kelowna. In Lake Country, our OCP process was very thorough. I feel like we have outlined a pretty solid plan for the next 20 years or so. Will it change and adapt? Of course. But I see no need at this stage.

We just expanded our Urban Containment Boundary. I'd have to review this on a case by case.

I would love to see stricter guides from the Province on what and how much can be charged to DCCs. I feel like municipalities sometimes treat it as free money for already needed upgrades. Our DCCs are very high. If the formula was more strict and less interpretive or speculative, we'd see those rates drop. They would fluctuate more often but at least they would be accurate.

It's not just housing construction. We are developing a Light Industrial Park and I would love to see that start getting built. We would create jobs for the construction of it but also jobs in the buildings themselves as they become they're intention.

Depending on what the development is… We don't have unlimited space in Lake Country. It's a precious community that is still safe and not facing the issues other surrounding cities are facing.

We need micro-business storefronts, creating higher returns for the developer from more tenants paying a slightly higher rent for a smaller amount of square footage.

Open air walkable malls with multi use business centres would attract many people to Lake Country. As a former cafe owner in both Calgary and Kelowna, I can say first hand it is not easy or affordable for a sole proprietor to open a anymore and the mom and pop shops are being phased out.

As a recruiter, I would reach out to businesses we want to expand into Lake Country whether its private medical centres, specialty grocery, local franchisors or unique business models that would provide a diverse business offering and reliable tenants/motivated buyers who can afford the commercial rental rates and not turning over every 5 years.

For housing we need to use the same model and create Micro Bachelor and single person units that are $300-500K to purchase otherwise they are NOT attainable by an average single person living here.

College students (and their parents), rental investors, elderly people and single working professionals are priced out of the Lake Country Market currently and none of the "Affordable housing developments" have really reduced the cost of living at all. Not significantly enough to make it affordable to live here.

We need "out of the box," modern communities developed such as "off-grid" treehouse communities, bachelor townhomes, apartment highrises with underground parking and amenities in our downtown core & mobile parks that model Deer Meadows type spaces, developed in the appropriate landscapes. And of course the million dollar custom mansions of course, that pay a bulk of our tax base.

Yes, people shouldn't have to feel they aren't employable in their own community. We need a local service that can support and connect people to employers who are hiring.

We should not have to drive to Kelowna/Vernon not only for many services but to also make a living. I am for infusing our small business sector, bringing services within our communities reach by recruiting and collecting the experts we need to address the issues where we are currently falling behind such as road repairs.

The new industrial area we just zoned is a great opportunity to provide rent-able space to all types of businesses and also support a stronger tax base so it is not all falling on residential shoulders.

A hire a student program could help train, shape and provide work opportunities to students eager to get into the job market.

Yes I am a huge advocate against the housing mandates that are not even providing affordable solutions to people anyways.

Why should Lake Country and many other rural towns have to accept a "one size fits all" policy when we (the greater community) do not want that kind of astronomical growth here and do not have the roads, water or resources to sustain it anyways and the units being built are too expensive to attract anyone to rent/buy them creating the same issue Kelowna ran into, OVER development.

That means whatever we are building needs to be super smart and super value added projects.

We are developing for the sake of developing but our Business Sector has been ignored too long and we need to catch up the commercial sector and allow space for businesses & services to open up to the people we have living here and the families we owe it to.

Yes, Lake Country has the WORST reputation I'm certain, in the entire Okanagan; for being far behind in processes, solutions and being not-timely or even at times incompetent.

I'd also like to know why we can't seem to perform at a rate that is on par with other municipalities our size and what we could do first hand to attract developers, bids and business to work with us again.

I am all for removing red tape, streamlining processes, re-evaluating what is not working and using trial and error to get it fixed immediately, not over time. Also, using the feedback of the end user to help us in attaining success with it.

Sorry, we are too far in debt as a province.

Yes it is the Provincial Government who is screwing around with our money but no we cannot afford to not collect GST from new home sales at this point in the economy.

Yes, everyone is going to want a different type of dwelling.

We should not stop building custom homes and regular homes just because it has become a priority of the Province. That doesn't necessarily reflect the needs, demand and WANTS of people moving to the Okanagan.

Yes city hall should strictly zone for what types of housing can be created and have a wide range of options that are available, from micro suites to custom built communities.

People move here for the beauty and want to live in a peaceful setting, away from the Chaos that cannot currently be cleaned up. We have a lot of beautiful land in Canada and eventually, some of it will need to be developed to support the populations. So Yes.

Yes, depending on the development and the feedback from the surrounding neighborhoods. I believe some projects are have much wider support than others and when there is major push-back on certain projects, this needs to be considered and acted upon to find a resolution or compromise.

I do agree with this. It's not that balanced to have new homeowners pay for inflation, increases and government decisions that are SUPPOSED to make housing attainable when in fact it is working against new home buyers.

I can speak to this first hand. My child's father is a 30 year Drywaller. One of the best in the Business and lately work for his Family Built Drywall business is hard to come by.

Right now in the trades in the Okanagan that long time men who have helped build our communities can no longer get work; causing mental health strain, family uncertainty and food instability. This causes people to be priced out of the own communities and have to find alternative housing and work that is not what they would have planned for.

This is why I am for more development infusion in the Commercial Sector, attracting new types of business such as Film/Tech and Industrial. If people can move here and know they can obtain employment, the houses we are building will then be sold/rented.

The business opportunities need to come first.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

I don't like the way this question is phrased, especially using terms like 'restrict' and 'forced.' City Hall shouldn't be forcing lifestyle choices on anyone.

However, do I think Council should have a say? Yes, absolutely. We have a responsibility to manage growth, but we should use zoning as a collaborative tool rather than a blunt instrument of control. We should be working with local builders to create a flexible, predictable framework, so we can encourage housing for families.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

No explanation provided.

I don't usually respond to yes or no answers as a policy as the answer is usually somewhere in between. We need to work with the development community to ensure we are filling our housing needs requirements based on long term strategies and assessments. A no answer to this doesn't mean I am against building but we have to be thoughtful about how it is accomplished.

Lake Country is in an infrastructure deficit and has been for the 20 years I have lived here. Council is currently improving this situation by hiring in house paving crews and infrastructure to improve this deficit and we are creating good paying jobs in our community to do this. I don't think a pro-growth agenda is needed to meet the needs that are expressed in this question. I believe growth done in a thoughtful way is important and bringing diversity of housing options to the community. Council has created this environment over the last four years.

I am answering no because municipalities can't support new development on the backs of current tax payers. There needs to be another solution. Lake Country has taken a diverse approach and we have compromised based on attracting the type of building that has been an identified need and recognition for the risks developers are taking. The part we could not compromise was the development cost charges which are very much needed for our community infrastructure.

Yes we have already cleaned up our processes dramatically over the last 3 years particularly and continue to improve process.

I am not familiar with this advancement and I commit to learning more but it makes sense in that most or all of the materials have already paid GST on the materials.

Again I will answer no based on this leading question, but the answer is not yes vs. no. I think that over regulation can be a concern and should be investigated. This is not the current situation in Lake Country but I commit to learning more to prevent unintended consequences of over regulation.

We are focusing growth in the UCB. I believe this question is more geared to Kelowna as Lake Country has few infill development opportunities. Lake Country does need to develop our downtown core and if that is considered infill I don't believe I agree with the premise of this question.

We just adopted our OCP so I would have to be convinced otherwise.

This is a very leading question and there are a lot of assumptions here that I would love to challenge. However, transparency and fairness makes sense to me. I think the builders and developers together with Council must create a document that explains home prices and property taxes. There are many factors that influence affordability for renters and residents.

We are focused on job creation and maintaining housing as per our long term plans. I am not going to say it should be a top priority as it was for the past Council term and we have to make sure we have balance on priorities. I will say we can't have a pendulum of start and stop for building because that will continuously result in situations that lead to a housing crisis.