Letter from Barry and Suzana Kalyn Re: Covenant EK061366

To the Mayor and Council of View Royal

For the Record:

In light of a recent News article in the Times Colonist Dated April 28, 2017 by reporter Lawrie McFarlane with the Heading, "Saanich homeowners face a trial by ordeal ". This article has caused me concern regarding my own process with View Royal in Relation to the Covenant numbered EK061366 and the removal of same requested by ten property owners. Said article raises issues with an Environmental Development Permit area (EDPA). The article references properties not being grandfathered due to (the new changes) and the loss of property values since the implementation of the EDPA in 2012. What alarms me is the significant decrease to property values. This now brings to mind issues that I feel have not been fully addressed. To note I do not claim to speak on behalf of the other nine property owners Re. Covenant EK061366 Even though some or all of the other property owners may or may not agree with the content of this letter.

There has been no written explanation as to why the Ray Halladay Report and recommendations in 2007 was not implemented. What has been claimed was that "Staff" did not forward the report to Mayor and Council. This has been difficult to accept given that the report states to inform the property owners and recommends that the Covenant be removed. The Halladay report should be included as part of the final decision in this process.
Nothing in writing to give assurance that the properties be grandfathered to setbacks regarding the riparian area to the Craig Flower Creek which was 15 meters (not 30 meters) at the time of our development (1996). No notification was given of Park setbacks nor the "DPA" or description thereof. The property owners were never included as stakeholders or stewards in regards to the Covenant.
Negative impact to property values. Was the Capital Region Assessment Authority informed by View Royal that there was a Covenant and EPA attached to our properties? In fact some property owners were not even aware a Covenant was attached to their properties let alone a DPA.
Permissive Tax exemption should have been applied to our properties, given the negative impact to property values and all the restrictions that have been applied to our land. The exemption in my view should have automatically been implemented. Land that in reality we did not own but paid full taxes on; Property in essence that we are unable to use in the same manner as other property owners in View Royal.
Given all the layers of restrictions, SEPA, DPA, Park setbacks, Fish bearing Creek etc., etc. . . . How was this Development permitted to go in? Why was a Covenant of 7.5 Meters which goes to my back door added on to my property, which does not even give me a back yard?

The above concerns have not been generated by the home owners but rests squarely on View Royal. This process will jeopardize the outcome if current guidelines and setbacks are used, as this subdivision predates the new restrictions. Therefore this subdivision should be grandfathered to the restrictions that were in place, at the time the subdivision went in. The request is that the Covenant EK061366 be removed entirely along with the DPA with normal property setbacks.

Respectfully Submitted,

Barry and Suzana Kalyn (property owners of 2227 Meadowvale Drive since 1996)