Text of the Resolution of February, 2006
Regular Meeting of Council
February 13, 2006
Page 5 of 13
The main motion was adopted with three amendments, the final wording being:
RES# 06-042
It was Moved and Seconded
Whereas:The current property owners at Cape Roger Curtis envision a development that could significantly affect, in one way or another, all members of the Bowen community as well as future generations;
Cape Roger Curtis is one of the last remaining undeveloped coastlines of great beauty and ecological sensitivity in the Vancouver region;
Cape Roger Curtis has been treasured by generations of Bowen Islanders for its remarkable shorelines, viewscapes and natural characteristics;
Bowen Island has very limited opportunity for public access to its shorelines along waterfront trails, other than at Cape Roger Curtis;
The coastal ecosystem of Cape Roger Curtis is rare for the east side of Georgia Strait, and includes environmentally sensitive areas and rare species;
Large scale development at Cape Roger Curtis could have significant and negative transportation impacts on Bowen Island, including on adjacent neighbourhoods;
BE it resolved that Council consider the public interest at Cape Roger Curtis to include the following:
a. Conserving the majority of the coastline for eco-system protection;
b. Where there are no adverse ecological impacts, develop public, waterfront, walking trails along the majority of the coastline, connecting to the cross-island greenway;
c. Environmental protection of the land including environmentally sensitive areas and rare species;
d. Clustering of homes and any other structures in any new development to reduce land disturbance, maximize green space and the opportunity for trails, and facilitate transportation alternatives;
e. Minimizing and mitigating any negative impacts from any Cape Roger Curtis development on the adjacent neighbourhoods and on the Bowen Island community as a whole.
BE it also resolved that public interest may be further refined during any subsequent public process. CARRIED
Cape Roger Curtis – Action Plan RES# 06-043
It was Moved and Seconded
Whereas:
- Council has identified its view of the public interest for Cape Roger Curtis;
- There is no comprehensive plan for Cape Roger Curtis that identifies and responds to the public interest;
- There is an application for road access by the Cape Roger Curtis owners across Crown Land that could negatively impact the public interest; and whereas the Water, Land and Air Protection Ministry has provided an extension to February 17, 2006 for Council to respond to this application;
- There has been as application for road access from Whitesails Drive that could negatively impact that neighbourhood; and
- Both Bowen Island Municipality and the land owner have expressed interest in GVRD participation in negotiations.
BE it resolved
That staff be directed to meet with the applicant to discuss a comprehensive rezoning application consistent with these principles. CARRIED
One member of Council in Opposition
Adoption of Municipal Framework for Planning the Future of the Cape Roger Curtis Lands
A motion relating to the adoption of the “Municipal Framework for Planning the Future of the Cape Roger Curtis Lands” was moved and seconded. After debate, the following amendment was proposed:
It was moved and seconded that the following sentence be removed from page 3 of the Framework under Subdivison Application – Preliminary Layout Review (PLR): “Council agrees that it would be desirable for the solicitors for the Municipality and CRCJV to meet along with their respective clients to work out a mutually acceptable solution to this matter.” DEFEATED
Six members of Council in opposition
The main motion was adopted without amendments, the final wording being:
RES# 06-044 It was Moved and Seconded
That Council adopt the Municipal Framework for Planning the Future Use of the Cape Roger Curtis Lands as outlined in Appendix 1 of the Planning Consultant’s report dated February 7, 2006; and
That resolutions No. 06-042 and No. 06-043 pertaining to “public interest” be included in the Municipal Planning Framework. CARRIED
One member of Council in opposition
Cape Roger Curtis – Reporting Process RES# 06-045
It was Moved and Seconded
That Council request the Planning Consultant to report back to Council on a regular basis regarding follow up discussions with the Cape Roger Curtis Joint Venture and the Integrated Land Management Bureau. CARRIED
Cape Roger Curtis – Items for discussion with Cape Roger Curtis Joint Venture RES# 06-046
It was Moved and Seconded
If there is a rezoning application, that Council direct staff to reference the following items in discussions with Cape Roger Curtis Joint Venture:
- The inclusion of an agricultural component (agricultural uses could include an equestrian centre, kitchen/market gardens) within those areas outlined in Schedule B2 of the Official Community Plan and ensure that any development does not unduly impact agricultural potential;
- The provision of a possibility for an institutional anchor;
- The development fully pay for any public costs incurred – i.e. that there be a true reckoning of the aggregate impacts on the community;
- The support for civic facilities located on the land or elsewhere be embedded in the project;
- The potential for density transfer be identified and encouraged;
- The whole project be a “Green Development” – using established standards for construction (i.e. following our green building guidelines or abiding by LEED, Energuide 80 or R2000), plus enhanced ‘Best Practices” for land alteration. CARRIED
Councillors Hocking and Shatzky re: Proposed motion regarding public involvement in Cape Roger Curtis
A motion relating to public interest for Cape Roger Curtis was moved and seconded. After debate, the following amendments were proposed:
It was moved and seconded that Bowen Island Municipal Council supports community members and groups to become involved in the rezoning process, including where possible in a coordinated way, securing conservation funding that may be applied to protecting Cape Roger Curtis lands. DEFEATED
Five members of Council in opposition
It was moved and seconded that “..including where possible, securing conservation funding…” be changed to “…including where possible in a coordinated way, securing conservation funding…”. CARRIED
One member of Council in opposition
The main motion was adopted with one amendment, the final wording being as follows:
RES# 06-047 It was Moved and Seconded
That Bowen Island Municipal Council supports community members and groups to become involved in the rezoning process, including where possible in a coordinated way, securing conservation funding that may be applied to protecting Cape Roger Curtis lands, and exploring other alternatives for Cape Roger Curtis for the purpose of helping the municipality achieve its objective of protecting the public interest in these lands. CARRIED
One member of Council in opposition
Archived materials
Posts
- Fall 2009 update
- Legal Opinion on CRC Subdivision Application
- Parks Canada Initiative – Fall/Winter 2009
- Disappointment: The Owner’s New Proposal for Cape Roger Curtis
- Cape Trust Society praised for quality of work
- Fifty-eight-lot subdivision application for the Cape shouldn’t be on the table
- Cape Roger Curtis Trust Society Launches Wild Coast Plan 2
- CRC Plan Beyond Comprehensive
- Bowen agleam in red and green
- Wild Coast Plan 2
Documents
- Why environmental inventories are insufficient for conservation planning: Comments on the 2008 PGL report on CRC
- Four-legged friend or foe? Dog walking displaces native birds from natural areas
- Mitigating and adapting to Climate Change through conservation of nature
- CRC writer ignored biological issues
- Cape Roger Curtis Biophysical Summary
- Overview Environmental Inventory
- Success Stories Show Park at Cape Roger Curtis Not Impossible
- Council Resolution Defining the Public Interest in Cape Roger Curtis
- Follow up from Dr. Karel Klinka’s Assessment of the Cape Roger Curtis Property
- Ecological Assessment and Considerations in Developing the Cape Roger Curtis Property
Letters
- CRC Trust Society makes clear its position
- Trust Society comments on Neighbourhood Plan of September 2008
- Trust Society Comments on Ekistics’ Preliminary Neighbourhood Plan and Implementation Options
- CRC Transportation Study Points to the Need for an OCP Review
- It’s all in the numbers-–hundreds of houses are just too many
- Council encouraged to instate DCCs
- Developers should be held to task
- Walk Your Talk Inside and Outside
- CRC developers upped ante unacceptable
- Transparent or veiled?