The Cape Roger Curtis development saga has taken another bizarre twist. In 2004 the developers who had purchased the 630 acres at the south-western tip of Bowen Island applied for subdivision. Eventually their application was reviewed and the Approving Officer (AO) laid out a number of deficiencies, conditions and requirements. Subsequent to that rejection the developers tried and failed to gain support for a much higher density neighbourhood plan. So now they are once again applying for a subdivision.
This is where the whole deal goes off the rails. You may have to read this account of the current situation several times to figure it out because it defies all logic and to the uninitiated, wading through the jargon is like swimming in mud. First of all you have to know about preliminary layout reviews (PLR’s). This is the AO’s initial response to any subdivision application. That has been done. Then the applicant revises the proposal and resubmits it. That was almost done. The first PLR critiqued a 60-lot application. A revised application proposed 58 lots but it was withdrawn when it became apparent that it failed to satisfy the original PLR. Now the developers have returned but they aren’t asking for a further review in light of their attempts to satisfy the PLR, they are demanding that this application for 59 lots be reviewed as a Final Application within 60 days and either be accepted or rejected “with reasons”. Presumably they are hoping that they will then only have to deal with the reasons listed.
So on June 4th the AO was confronted with a massive pile of technical documents and told that he had 60 days to review it and respond. When I read this I couldn’t believe it. Nothing this detailed could possibly be dealt with properly in the time mandated. So I read the law referred to and quickly realized that the AO should have thrown this back at the applicants without considering it. There are so many reasons available to the AO to reject this application that it would take a week to explain them – but how’s this for starters; this is listed as one reason for refusal “the highways shown in the plan are not cleared, drained, constructed and surfaced to his satisfaction, or unless, in circumstances he considers proper, security in the amount and in a form acceptable to him is provided;” To put this into context; CRC hasn’t built the roads and they can’t build the roads without a development permit and municipal council has to approve any development permits so the AO couldn’t give a final approval to this subdivision if he wanted to, which he wouldn’t want to do because they haven’t even built the roads yet.
While I was waiting to see how the AO would send them packing he issued a report. He said that he had meetings with the CRC people before they submitted their application. He stressed that the approval of the subdivision was solely his responsibility but he felt that he should keep us informed. He acknowledged that, under the legislation, he had only 60 days to issue a final response. However he told us that he had informed the applicant that because of holidays and the time required to conduct due diligence and the fact that there will be a new AO on July 13, this date would not be met. He went on to list all the high-priced consultants that he had brought on-board (at the applicants expense) to conduct the necessary technical review. He then told us – and this is the kicker – that he plans to forward a list of requirements to the applicant in early July.
Our AO goes on to explain that beyond the technical review he is conducting a “Community Consultation Process”. He will accept submissions from the public until Friday, July 10 (his last day on the job) although he stresses that the AO is not bound by any comments submitted. So here’s where we are. Our current Approving Officer met with the applicants, accepted a subdivision application which he knew that he could not approve, constructed a community review process that would be completely useless and undertook to provide the applicants with a list of requirements before he was replaced by a new AO. I’m not kidding.
The application was received June 4. It was inappropriate to consider it a final application (one step away from being registered at the Land Titles Office). Even as a final application there is no requirement to respond before August 3. However our AO has undertaken to provide the applicants with a list of requirements on or before his last day on the job July 10. The only debate will be over whether his “requirements” could be construed as “reasons”.
And where is our council during all of this? They’ve got their heads firmly buried in the sand, afraid to be accused of interfering with a staff level process. Meanwhile, the solution to this travesty is extraordinary simple. All council has to do is to live without an AO for the next couple of weeks and allow the new one to take a little more time with the “community consultation” portion of his job description.
{ 4 } Comments
Yours is a very useful summary. I would only comment at this point that it’s my intent to consult as widely as practical before making any ruling. By widely I mean community, council, staff, and developer. I have already been in preliminary discussions with council and staff, including the outgoing AO, our planners, and our legal advisor. I look forward to advice and information as well from the community, and to interaction with the developer. Regards.
Thank you for your comment Hendrik. Welcome to Bowen. For those of you who don’t know, Mr. Slegtenhorst is our new Chief Administative Officer. On Bowen that job also includes being our Approving Officer.
Even an ostrich comes up for air! Here’s the orientation with respect to any proposed development at Cape Roger Curtis.
Bowen Island’s Official Community Plan and Land Use Bylaw both point to the unique attributes found on the Cape Roger Curtis lands and marine environments. In February 2006, Council endorsed further clarification of the ‘public interest’ by way of its municipal framework resolution. The public clearly expressed its perspectives on the Cape lands during the recent so-called ‘Neighbourhood Plan’ deliberation. Importantly, under the Islands Trust authority, the Bowen Island Municipality’s duty with regard to land use planning is broadly considered. The Trust’s policy statement reads:
““The object of the Trust is to preserve and protect the Trust Area and its unique amenities and environment for the benefit of the residents of the Trust Area and of British Columbia generally, in cooperation with municipalities, regional districts, improvement districts, other persons and organizations and the government of British Columbia.”
Given the nationally recognized ecological and archaeological significance of the Cape Roger Curtis lands, as well as the property’s unique regional recreational amenities, consideration of any development proposal on the Cape lands ought to, by statute, be comprehensive in its scope and integrity. I believe this provides a clear framework for the Approving Officer to exercise their duty and authority with regard to a subdivision application on the Cape lands.
With all due respect Doug. I am not so sure that the CRC land is as nationally recognized as you are portraying it to be. I am sure if it were, either the provincial or even federal government would have stepped in and acquired the lands in question and turned it into a preserve of park long before now. It is my understanding that you and Councillor Poole were suppose to report back to council regarding your efforts on this very matter by the end of June. What are your findings?
For me I will trust Mr Slegtenhorst’ s wisdom and integrity to indeed do the right and legal thing and approve the proposal if it meets all the requirements contained out in the OCP and not succumb to the pressures of special interest groups such as the one that you were a member of and Council Poole was a director of.
Post a Comment