At the June 26, 2010 Annual General Meeting of the Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society, Will Husby and Michael Dunn presented information about how Parks Canada works, and the possible creation of a National Park on Bowen Island.
The declared mandate of Parks Canada: “On behalf of the people of Canada, we protect and present nationally significant examples of Canada’s natural and cultural heritage, and foster public understanding, appreciation and enjoyment in ways that ensure the ecological and commemorative integrity of these places for present and future generations.”
The following was prepared by Will Husby as a handout for attendees at the AGM:
The following was submitted by the Directors to the OCP Update Committee - April 2010
1. As the subdivision of Cape Roger Curtis has been approved and clearing and road building has commenced, we must look to the OCP update to protect remaining lands (there are no equivalent lands to CRC – they are unique). Michael Rosen stated that no clause existed in the present OCP, or in the Municipal Act, to make “public interest” one of the deciding factors in any approval of subdivision applications. Therefore, we recommend that any OCP update must correct and strengthen this omission. However, Section 1.2 of the existing Plan (under “Implementation”) requires Council to consider the needs of the public in any decisions. To quote from Consultation with the Public: “The strength of the plan exists in the commitment of the people that it affects to participate in and influence its implementation.” We read this to mean that this obliges any land use approval be cognizant of this sentence, which in our minds equates with considering the “public interest.”
2. The OCP Zoning Bylaw designated size of lots in order to control the use of land. In CRC‘s case, the ten-acre zoning was to ensure that the density allowed would minimize stress on the ecology and retain the rural character. Therefore, we request that the OCP update conforms to the Land Use Bylaw and retains the present zoning and prohibits further subdivision of the lots, thus preventing fragmentation of this sensitive ecological site.
3. Should a national park be considered for CRC by Parks Canada, this possibility should be strongly supported by the OCP. A park acquisition to preserve and protect some or all of that unique land and its ecosystems, besides contributing to the well being of the public, is very much in the public interest.
4. Whatever the outcome for this land, there must be environmental protection through dual covenants, i.e. 2 independent monitoring parties, not including the land owner (the BI Conservancy knows the importance of this and how it should be implemented). We emphasize that covenants must be monitored frequently, be strictly enforced and stiff penalties applied for infringements. This type of covenant must require the widest possible riparian zones, secure protection for steep slopes, coastal bluffs and all trees and stumps > .50 m and be considered essential for protecting the habitat of red- and blue-listed species.
It is important that covenants should be monitored by parties who have expertise in protection of the environment and have this as one of their express aims. The parties should perform monitoring on a random but regular basis. Apart from a hefty fine, both community service and a public apology could be required of a covenant violator as a deterrent to further violations.
5. We believe that the OCP update should extend tree protection to the rest of the island, as well as covenants to give protection to foreshores adjacent to sensitive marine areas. Stiff penalties for breaking a covenant or for environmental damage must be enforced.
July 30, 2009
There have been numerous statements over the past few months suggesting that the owners of CRC have the “legal right” to a 58-lot subdivision at Cape Roger Curtis. None of these statements can be attributed to a person with knowledge of municipal law, and appear to be simply a strategy to gain support for the CRC development. We now have a legal opinion on the matter.
Legal Opinion on CRC Subdivision Application (PDF)
Through a coalition of two Bowen organizations, the Bowen Island Eco-Alliance and the CRC Trust Society, a group of concerned citizens has come together to seek legal information about the subdivision process, specifically as it relates to CRC and the subdivision application that has been submitted by its owners. We have, through our own internal resources, retained the services of Don Lidstone, Q.C. who is considered by many to be one of the preeminent municipal lawyers in BC. (His biography is available online.) Mr. Lidstone has created a review of the subdivision application, which you can download as a PDF.
Mr. Lidstone’s review leads to some significant conclusions:
1. There are good grounds for the rejection of the most recent subdivision application relating to the CRC lands, arising from the application itself and from the applicable law.
2. If the approving officer does not reject the application, then opponents of this particular application would have good grounds on which to challenge his decision in court.
We think it is important for accurate legal information to be publicly available and we are are hoping that you will agree. We would appreciate it if you could draw other people’s attention to this as soon as possible.
As most people on Bowen already know, the CRC Trust Society has worked tirelessly for over 5 years to preserve and protect the lands of Cape Roger Curtis as stated in the mandate of the Islands Trust. The Trust Society is a group of people who would have preferred that the whole Cape be preserved as a park. In reality, this now appears not to be a possibility.
There are people on the island who think that the Trust Society would sacrifice anything to have part of this land preserved as a park. There are others who believe that the Trust Society is putting in jeopardy the possibility of any parkland at the Cape by taking a stand against the proposed “CRC Neighbourhood Plan”. To all those who hold either of these views I would say the following:
A park at Cape Roger Curtis would be a wonderful gift for those of us living on this island and an important legacy for future generations but we are not willing to sacrifice the quality of life of the rest of Bowen to preserve a small portion of the south west corner of this beautiful, rural municipality. As much as we care about the Cape lands, value the ecological uniqueness of it and recognize that compromise may be necessary, we also have a responsibility to consider the well-being of the island as a whole. We are not willing to put our interest in the preservation of Cape Roger Curtis ahead of our concern for the rest of Bowen Island and the diversity that it represents: its seniors; its low income residents; its business people; its commuters. It is for all these reasons that every member of the Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society Board has endorsed the “100 for Bowen ad.”
Ellen Coburn, on behalf of the Directors of the Trust Society
Background
Last year the owners of the CRC lands decided to embark on a new direction in developing the property. Their initiative at the time, to create a 58 lot subdivision, was creating an increasingly acrimonious debate with the Bowen community and events were turning confrontational (locked gates erected to keep out local hikers, the brazen cutting of a gruesome ‘driveway’ off of Whitesails, etc.). The new direction came in response to the olive branch being offered by our municipal council: an invitation to a comprehensive rezoning process that would put all of the stakeholders at the table and create a more ‘community’ grounded solution to the Cape’s development. Ownership announced it had retained a new face to the negotiations (Mark Sager) and engaged the design and planning firm of Ekistics Town Planning Inc. They also successfully negotiated to keep their subdivision application in the queue, as a fallback position and to protect the CRC land from being down zoned in the future, in case the new public round of negotiations failed (though this is a rather unique situation and perhaps questionable from a legal point of view).
The Process
Before presenting the municipality with an official proposal, the owners decided to initiate a public campaign, to lay the groundwork for their plan and to consult with the community. In July 07 Bowen islanders had a first look at their new thinking. Ekistics and ownership held a public meeting where they unveiled a broad CRC land use plan.
Download Ekistics Land Use Plan (PDF)
Through that and 2 subsequent public meetings ownership and Ekistics built their case. Using their own research data (which was not made available at the time) they marketed a vision for the Cape that was a broad, ambitious and sophisticated town/village styled plan. Some of it was wonderful and appealing – 100 % waterfront protection, large park and green areas, community amenities including seniors housing, a community center, etc. Some of it was infuriating: it’s massive size and scale (the 80 room inn would be the largest in the Gulf Islands) requiring grand and expensive infrastructure costs and a 25 year build out, with pods of development spread throughout the property, limited and disconnected park areas, etc. And some of it just left many of us shaking our heads – the price for this grand plan was a density of 800 -1200 units (1100 being the purported request), many times above the OCP cap of 224 units.
The Response
After the 3 public showcases led by the Ekistics group, it was then time for a Bowen response and council directed the latest presentation to its various referral groups on the island. This included the CRC Trust Society, the APC, the Conservancy, the Sustainability Framework Working Group, Affordable Housing, etc. Responses came back earlier this year and have now been collected and summarized by the Bowen Island planning staff. This summary was then presented to council in a staff report.
Download staff report: Update on Cape Roger Curtis Comprehensive Planning Process
The feedback covered a lot of ground – that affordable housing be a component of the development, that any design be filtered through the new sustainability framework, etc. – but a few very consistent and clear messages emerged from the consultation process. Included on the list, much of which has now been publicly endorsed by Bowen council, is the need for a large, contiguous, marine based wilderness park (larger than shown on the Ekistics plans), with density that remains capped at the OCP ceiling of 224 units (though allowing for concessions for amenities like senior’s housing and affordable housing), a reduction in size of the development footprint, construction of a mix of housing styles and forms, etc. A new park boundary map has recently emerged that council recently endorsed (now called the ‘Community Conservation and Recreation Land Map – Vs. 2’, see enclosed). This map needs careful attention because it will very likely be critical to the negotiations ahead; it represents a meaningful saw-off between what the owners have been promoting (100% coastline protection, a large wild park area, a limited footprint for development on the Cape), and what council, green conservancy groups, the CRC Trust Society, planners and others in the community may be able to agree to as the basis for a final solution. The proposed park would incorporate the adjoining crown lands where Fairy Fen is sited and protect almost the entire Huszar Creek watershed. This would constitute the most significant new park of any being considered for the lower mainland. As well, recreation along the west coast right down to the lighthouse would be protected.
Also in this period two new voices were added to the Bowen negotiating team: Mel Turner, a retired BC Park planner, who has both volunteered his time and has been retained as a park creation consultant by the municipality (see accompanying article), and Jeff Herold, a highly regarded land economist, who has been retained to evaluate the financial numbers and the economic assumptions underpinning the owners’ density requests.
The Proposal
The owners of CRC put forward a formal proposal to the community on May 7, then resubmitted an amended plan a week later that now stands as their first official proposal for developing the Cape.
There is lots of material here with many maps. Some of the key elements to take note of include:
- The density request, which now amounts to 490 units
- There is no longer 100% waterfront protection.
- The lighthouse area and a large chunk of the south slope are now slated for rural residential housing.
- Only 30% of the land is wilderness park, in the southeast corner of the property.
- There is a concentrated development hub area (village) on the central west side.
- The development adds extra density in the form of an 80 room Inn with restaurant, a 150,000 sq. ft. seniors’ ‘Campus of Care’ facility, 5000 sq. ft. of commercial, a school, playgrounds, community center and amphitheater.
- The design includes a complex sanitary sewage grid, with a sewage treatment plant sitting on the park border right over the south slope.
Negotiations to Come
For many of us close to the negotiations, this proposal is a disappointment. It creates a wide gap between what our community representatives have been asking for and what the owners seem willing to give. Surprising really, because they have publicly stated that they want to close the deal with the current council and before the upcoming November elections (and several councilors have publicly stated their willingness to work to the wire, even through the fall campaign). The municipality’s message has been consistent and clear – smaller development, larger park, all within OCP density numbers – as a basis for accelerating the process.
But that’s definitely not where we’re at. The proposal seems to miss the critical importance to our community of protecting the Cape area itself. The owners have taken a big step backwards from their original concept, dating back to their first public meeting last September, which dangled the enticing prospect of 100% waterfront protection.
Developers in communities like ours always like to market their planning around the ‘neighbourhood’ moniker, and this plan is no different. But a closer look at this proposal, with its broad and fractured development footprint, its massively ambitious and expensive pre-building infrastructure, it’s consistently over-scale imagination, suggests that the underlying thinking still falters from what has hobbled the planning from the start: big ideas coloured by a ‘mainland’ context, imaginative planning perhaps for a city, town, or community in the Okanagan, but definitely not (or at least, not yet) a plan consistent with Bowen Island’s dreams for itself.
And still no wild, contiguous, marine based park representing a minimum of 50% of the CRC lands, the goal of so many of us who love that land and seek to preserve CRC’s extraordinary aesthetic and simple beauty.
The Struggle Ahead
Allot is about to come in to play as the now intensifying negotiations over the Cape heat up. First and foremost, any discussion about a development on Cape Roger Curtis has to reflect our concern for both the values the land has to offer and the quality and impact that any development will have on all Bowen Islanders. The immediate struggle looks like a battle over density and over a park boundary that will need to include the southwest corner/lighthouse area. Yes ownership has been generous to date, but they simply must be encouraged to go further. They have a unique opportunity to help create a significant park legacy.
But the park and the development are not yet what we want them to be. We must steel our resolve and bring to bear every opportunity at our disposal: use negotiating tools such as density transfer, eco gifting, amenity exchanges; bring to the table key players, such as BC Parks, The Land Conservancy, the GVRD (now Metro Vancouver), etc. who to date have only been circling the negotiations; and initiate a Bowen fundraising campaign, to start soon, that will demonstrate local determination for a successful, made-on-Bowen outcome.
There’s lots of work still to do, with much of it already underway. However, the mood amongst all the parties involved remains positive, and an inspired resolution feels tantalizingly closer.
By Stephen Foster
On behalf of the Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society
By Julie Andres - Bowen Island Undercurrent - April 11, 2008
Mayor Bob Turner gave a round of compliments to The Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society at their AGM last Saturday. “You deserve credit for your professionalism and for seeking legal advice,” he said. (See ‘Fifty-eight-lot subdivision application for the Cape shouldn’t be on the table’, the Undercurrent, April 4, or go to www.bowenislandundercurrent.com and click on the Letters tab in the main menu.) “The outcome here depends on quality and respect, and I applaud the Trust Society for their approach,” the mayor added.
The Trust Society’s mandate is, in part, “To ensure that as much as possible of the the Cape Roger Curtis lands remain in their natural state”.
In audience handouts the Trust Society distributed a three-page, month-by-month list of their preservation activities for the Cape since January 2003, when they received a Certificate of Incorporation under the Society Act. Commenting on the list, Mayor Turner said, “Many more pages will be added to this list. Patience is everything, and the Trust Society will be an important player over the long haul.”
The CRC landowners’ plan for development currently proposes over 60 per cent – including all waterfront – as dedicated park, but a much higher number of units than allowed under current zoning. The starting number discussed at the AGM was 224 units, which, according to Community Planner Jason Smith, is the number envisioned for the property in the Official Community Plan.
Council has assigned the proposal to the Greenways Committee, the Civic Facilities Working Group, the Sustainability Framework Working Group, The Affordable Housing Working Group and the Advisory Planning Commission for review. Each group is charged with providing a report on the plan to council. In their minutes of Feb. 6, the APC passed a motion by unanimous consent that read: “The APC recommends that Council consider utilizing alternative approaches to calculating density in a creative manner, such as floor area limits and/or bed unit counts, recognizing that any alternative approach be cognizant of equating to a dwelling unit yield of 224 units.”
The other above-noted referral groups, which are appointed and funded by council, are either not represented on the www.bimbc.ca website, or their minutes are not up to date.
The owners of the Cape, (acquired by Don Ho, Edwin Lee, Wolfgang Duntz and others in August 2004) were represented by their project coordinator Mark Sager, who said they have a good working relationship with everybody involved. “We are optimistic that both sides are going to find middle ground. We expect to have another public information meeting in May and a formal public hearing in early September,” he said.
At their public information meeting in December 2007, the developer’s exhibits showed expectations that the process would move along much more quickly than it has. The timeline graphic presented then showed adoption of a rezoning bylaw by March 2008.
True to form, the Trust Society included a high quality educational component in their AGM. Research ecologist and Bowen Island resident Alejandro Frid gave a talk about predators and climate change as they pertain to CRC. Lindsay Coulter, a conservation policy analyst with the David Suzuki Foundation spoke about her work around the province “pleading the case for B.C.’s biodiversity and the need for change in policy to protect it”.
Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society’s website is www.caperogercurtis.org. Information on the Cape on Bowen Community Development (the developers) can be found at www.caperogercurtis.com.
April 4, 2008
Bowen Island Undercurrent
We urge council to exercise its authority to require the owners of the Cape Roger Curtis (CRC) lands to withdraw their application for a 58-lot subdivision for the following reasons:
The Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society (CRCTS) has received legal advice that it is highly unusual for municipal councils to enter into a rezoning process while there is a subdivision application on the table. The public continues to perceive the subdivision application for 58 lots as a real threat if municipal council does not agree with the rezoning proposals of the CRC owners.
Community groups (including CRCTS) have spent considerable volunteer time attending meetings and reviewing and commenting on the CRC proposals, with a view to ensuring that the rezoning of these lands meets the goals and objectives of Bowen Islanders.
The subdivision of these lands into 58 ten-acre lots does not meet the goals and objectives of the Bowen Island community as expressed in the Official Community Plan (including the specific requirements set out for the CRC Development Permit Area), nor does it meet the stated public interest as expressed in the council’s resolution of February 2006 (Municipal Framework for Planning the Future Use of the CRC Lands).
The fact that the approving officer has neither approved nor rejected the 58 ten-acre lot subdivision does not relieve council of its responsibility to make it clear to the owners that a condition of entering the rezoning process is withdrawal of its subdivision application.
Given the length of time since the initial subdivision application (September 4, 2004) and the lack of any response from the CRC owners to the conditions set out in the July 7, 2006 letter from Michael Rosen, there is considerable doubt as to whether the application would be legally protected by the one year time period under section 943 of the Local Government Act, despite the extensions granted by the municipal planners.
Without demanding the withdrawal of the 58-lot subdivision application, council appears to be acting from a position of weakness, which inevitably affects its negotiation strategy. This is not serving the interests of the community.
If the current subdivision application is not legally valid (also based on good legal advice), then why not remove it from the table?
Pamela Dicer, Peter Drake, Stephen Foster, Jean Jamieson, Marion Moore, Nerys Poole, Jan Wells
Directors, Cape Roger Curtis Trust SocietyZZZ
by Eric Sherlock - March 7, 2008 — Bowen Island Undercurrent
Nowhere is there a greater need for a broad new community consensus than with the twin challenges facing Snug Cove village and Cape Roger Curtis.
Just over 10 years ago, I was elected as a trustee on Bowen Island as part of local government under the Islands Trust. We received a clear mandate from voters to implement the Island’s newly created Official Community Plan (OCP) and during that term, I was also part of overseeing Bowen’s transition to becoming the province’s only municipality within the Islands Trust.
The Island’s OCP has been modified since that time, most recently in 2005, to lay out a new Snug Cove Village Plan (SCVP). That new vision for Snug Cove resolved a desire to densify the Cove, while at the same time to retain the planned island-wide limit on number of dwelling units that is prescribed in the larger OCP. A density transfer mechanism that rewards developers who shift building rights from the rest of the island into the Cove was central to that resolution. The SCVP envisions townhouses and row housing, including extensive non-market housing, all with ground-level entry.
But the current municipal council seems to be preparing to rip up that plan, and to replace it with some version of their own, favoured Snug Cove Master Plan (SCMP), prepared by a consultant. This new proposal has some valuable aspects, but the plan’s call to construct four-storey apartment blocks, no doubt requiring elevators and special aerial-lift fire fighting equipment, directly attacks a long-held consensus about community character that has guided Bowen’s development for over a generation. Most seriously, the new proposal ignores the island-wide limit on housing density that is fundamental to the vision of the OCP.
Council is heading for a crisis because under Bowen’s Letters Patent, as an island municipality any rezoning that exceeds the OCP residential density limit requires approval of the Island’s Trust executive committee. And why should the Islands Trust approve a radical deviation in scale and character from the Snug Cove Village Plan that Bowen’s own municipal council formulated as policy less than three years ago?
This conflict over Snug Cove is directly related to the challenge at Cape Roger Curtis. There, council has lost the initiative it once had. Density transfer from the Cape into the Cove, no doubt, is key to some sort of solution. But the proposed SCMP does not contain this provision. And by favoring densities in Snug Cove that exceed the OCP, council’s authority to demand that the Cape Roger Curtis developers themselves adhere to the OCP density is critically compromised.
The fact is the current council has surrounded itself with building industry professionals who, not surprisingly, are advocating big city solutions and urban projects for Bowen Island. Many of these ideas are disconnected from the smaller scale and environmentally focused policies that have been inspired by the Islands Trust and are reflected in the existing OCP.
Originally, there was hope that an island municipality would combine greater local autonomy with a ‘slow island, small footprint’ approach to development. And although that hope has never been fulfilled, it still can be.
At this crucial time, council should issue a moratorium on development, as was done in the early 1990s by the Island trustees Graeme Dinsdale and Claus Spikermann, and engage the community in creating a comprehensive renewed vision for this beautiful place.
by Alejandro Frid, alejandro_frid@alumni.sfu.ca, February 28, 2008
Introduction
Here I comment on the PGL (January 2008) report on CRC. To make the best use of the time I can allot to volunteer work, I will focus on ecological issues that complement the expertise and input of local naturalists (e.g. SE Fast, A Whitehead, B. Gowans and others). Read more
Letter from the Directors of the Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society
to Bowen Island Municipality, Attention: Michael Rosen, 81 Artisan Lane, Bowen Island BC V0N 1G0
Re: Cape Roger Curtis — Preliminary Neighbourhood Plan and Implementation Options (dated January 3, 2008)
The Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society has been asked to comment on the three development options for the 631-acre Cape Roger Curtis (CRC) set out in maps on pages 22-23, 24-25 and 2627 of the Ekistics brochure entitled Preliminary Neighbourhood Plan & Implementation Options, dated January 3, 2008.
keep looking »
