A Brief History of Bowen Island – In the spirit of brevity I will start in the 1970’s. At that time the local Highways Department foreman approved subdivisions and you could purchase your Gulf Island summer get-away lot at a booth at the PNE. Then the provincial NDP party replaced the Social Credit party and things changed. It was realized that the islands in and around the Gulf of Georgia presented some unique challenges, such as transportation, and some unique opportunities, such as marine wildness areas. Thus the Island’s Trust was born. The first order of business was to freeze development while the Island’s Trust bureaucracy was put in place. So development on most of the larger parcels of land on Bowen was restricted to lots with a minimum size of ten acres. Shortly thereafter the provincial government decided that Official Community Plans (OCP) were a good idea and we did one for Bowen.
By then the people who owned land that was ripe for development were incensed by the freeze on subdivisions so the new OCP included proposed building lot densities which were more realistic than the ten acre zoning. This is where it gets interesting, for two reasons. First of all, the higher density apportioned for many parcels was based on a guess as to how easy it would be to put in septic fields and how much water was likely to be nearby. Today we realize that these criteria are virtually meaningless. You can now put in septic treatment almost anywhere and securing adequate water has been the bane of almost every subdivision created since then.
The new densities were supposed to be enshrined in the local Land Use Bylaw (LUB), which would have meant that the owner of the lands involved had a legal right to subdivide. That’s where the second interesting thing comes in. The OCP densities were never put in the LUB. So all of the additional building lots, which were supposed to be possible, remain highly theoretical.
I bring up all of this because the phrase “OCP density” gets thrown around like it’s a real number when, in fact it is completely meaningless. The Eco Alliance is constantly talking about a population of 7,200 as the OCP designated ultimate, totally built out population for Bowen. Then they attack the proposed project of the day because it doesn’t conform to this mythical number. The supporters of the development community still lament the fact that the OCP densities were never incorporated into the LUB and see every attempt to subdivide property as a fight against unreasonable limitations first imposed in the seventies. While both sides of this decades long debate have their points it is time to move on. My guess is that over half of our current population has moved here since 1990. While some have joined existing advocacy groups, most are more concerned with snow removal and ferry overloads than with proposed developments that never seem to go anywhere.
For me the interesting thing is that, while we have new players and a very different world, the basic perspectives are going to remain much the same. Many of us assumed that when the ferry reached capacity B.C. Ferries would simply give us a larger one. Instead they raised the fares until commuters couldn’t afford to take their cars on the boat. While it solved the problem it also reminded a lot of commuters that only so many people can fit on a boat so it might make sense to limit how many people you put on an island. On the other side we have those who advocate population growth so that we can have more amenities on Bowen and will therefore have to travel to town less. More amenities go over well in some circles but very few are buying the idea that an increased commuter population will result in less ferry use.
So as we move into 2010 we can expect that our greatest concern won’t be crime or corruption or homeless people or the safety of our children or the likelihood that our mill will shut down. As a community the most consuming problem we have is deciding how quickly we should develop building lots. You’ve got to admit that probably makes us just about the luckiest people on the planet.
My wish for all of us, as members of this warm and wonderful community, for the coming year is that we will continue to care for each other, we will continue to be passionate in our beliefs, we will continue to fight to keep our community strong and that we will continue to respect those who speak against our point of view. It is their passion and love of our island that makes them so important to us.
Janice and I will be away on vacation for a couple of weeks so you probably won’t see another Bulletin until late January. Until then, enjoy the holidays, have a Merry Christmas, and remember to tell those you love how much they mean to you.
{ 1 } Comments
A few corrections. The 10 acre freeze was imposed by the Socreds, in advance of the Islands Trust being set up. It WAS the result of concerns about the Magic Lake Estates 1600 lots for sale on North Pender and peddled at the PNE.
Bowen’s first OCP was largely based on the Hirvonen Landscape Analysis of 1976:
http://www.library.for.gov.bc.ca/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=D23R879786516.470461&profile=mof&uindex=TL&term=Bowen%20Island%20a%20Landscape%20Analysis&aspect=basic_search&menu=search&source=~!forest
The Zoning Bylaw #36, then the 2002 LUB, in differing from OCP densities, were not unusual, though the latter was challenged unsuccessfully by then Bowen lawyer John Singleton. He claimed that all bylaws subsequent to an OCP must be consistent with it. The courts decided that the overall language of the OCP was of more importance than its density designations, and agreed that the floor/ceiling approach was indeed legal.
Despite the rhetoric and polarities about ‘density’, beyond OCP densities have been granted at Cates Hill and Cowan’s Point, and OCP parity densities with all of John Reid’s various rezonings. Really, OCP densities have been achieved in all but Sunset Estates, where the Islands Trust refused Murray Cypress’s amenity bonusing proposal, and Phase 1 of Cowan’s which came into play after Praxis went bust in the early 90’s after Trustee Dave Morgan was at left at odds with his co-trustee of the time.
Certainly, King Edward Bay, which was approved by Islands Trust during the reign of GVRD Director Gail Taylor and her compliant Trustee brother-in-law, far exceeded OCP densities.
As to how fast we should be developing lots, for the most part it has been ‘market absorption rates’ that have largely dictated that…
Michael Ignatieff came to a Metro Vancouver Board meeting earlier this year. He gave a short speech about ‘the recession’, and then the floor was opened up for questions. I pushed my speaker button quickly, and was probably about number 5 in the queue. Almost all the early questions were about infrastructure grant money, and were answered with veiled criticism as to how the Tories were bungling them.
Then it was my turn. Each questioner was identified by the chair, Lois Jackson before he/she was given the floor. When Iggy heard I was from Bowen Island, his entire demeanor changed. He had been leaning forward, eyes narrow, intent and focused. Now his arms were opened, he stepped back. He paused, and then said: “You know, people from this part of the country are very fortunate. And those of you from Bowen are very fortunate indeed.” That elicited laughs all around. “So I hope you’re not going to ask me about infrastructure money! ” . (Actually, I wasn’t and didn’t- I asked him about his view of Canada’s role on the world stage, and how that might differ from the current government’s view. He did not take the bait- he talked about emerging Asian opportunities.)
Anyway- that’s in answer to your editorial. Yes, we ARE very fortunate to live here.
Post a Comment