​His Worship the Mayor and Council,

545 Nenzel Road Re-zoning Amendment
August 19, 2020


There are questions and concerns for Council to consider about the re-zoning of 545 Nenzel Road.

Mr. Sales responded to my question as to why this re-zoning amendment was not being processed as an OCP amendment. The answer wasn’t entirely clear and the reason for not processing the application as an OCP amendment was based on a number of various factors without explanation. Is Council also questioning why this rural 5 acre parcel  outside the Urban Containment Boundary (UCB) is being processed simply as a re-zoning? Is Council planning on adjusting the UCB to accommodate the development? And if not, why not? The re-zoning for 850 Eaglecrest Drive is also a rural property outside the the UCB, but is being processed as an OCP amendment. Why are these two re-zoning applications going through  different amendment processes?

Regarding this development’s OCP non-compliance and conflicting OCP policies, planning’s August 19, 2020 memorandum states, “As a result, policies specifying no growth in this area must be weighed against policies that support innovative approaches to housing.” Depending on one’s view point, objectives and values, deciding which of the aforesaid conflicting policies should take precedence is a subjective choice. Policies related to housing are simple and  straight forward. If one considers housing  a priority a simple and immediate solution is to build more houses. Policies around land use, growth and environmental stewardship are complex.  The broader issues of growth and land use have meaningful consequences now and in the future that can be either beneficial or harmful depending on how they are managed and implemented. I disagree with planning that the conflicting OCP policies related to Nenzel Road proposal are of equal ‘weight’.

Another consideration that has broader and longer term consequences is the direction this development proposal is leading Qualicum Beach. The future of Qualicum Beach, the future of people living here and future generations are dependant on the decisions and choices made today by  their  elected representatives. It is vital that our Council looks at this proposal from an holistic perspective and not solely as increasing housing stock. Residents hope that Council takes into account  land use OCP policies, the environment, location, and the long term consequences of land use changes.   We are told that Nenzel development would result in 6 rental houses, but there is more to this development than that single element. If Council votes in favour of the development, will there be a covenant attached to the development permit to ensure that the new homes remain as rental properties in perpetuity? It is not uncommon for a development permit to be awarded, but the final development ends up quite different from original plans. The applicant told the APC that he prefers to stratify the development.

When development occurs on the Island it normally entails tree removal, 634 Rye Road is an  example. In the past we accepted this as normal and moved on. However, we have reached a point in time both locally and globally that we  notice  the impacts  to our lives, environment and natural assets like clean water when altering land. These observations have compelled government, scientists and academics to look critically at how we use land. Unfortunately, our decisions are often short sighted resulting in profound affects on climate, natural resources, wildlife  and people’s health.

As part of the process and decisions around development of rural land  Council must consider the cumulative impacts on Qualicum Beach’s natural assets.

Since Planning is attempting to avoid an OCP amendment and a change to the UCB for 545 Nenzel Road application, the memorandum to Council neglects to include OCP policy 6 Section 2.1.1 where it lists the supporting documentation for any UCB expansion. One of the six documents is an environmental impact assessment that identifies environmentally sensitive areas. The memorandum did acknowledge that some of the property was within Ecological Development Permit Area of Aquatic Habitat Greenway.  Plannings response to this is that the development itself is outside the boundary of the DPA. Properties in this area are within Beach Creek watershed. Aside from Beach Creek there is abundant wildlife in the area around Nenzel Road. An environmental assessment must be a necessary requirement as part of the application process.


If Council chooses not to consider how much the community values the natural environment as expressed in the OCP and the community’s desire to protect rural land, and instead chooses to re-zone rural parcels for subdivision such as Nenzel Road and 850 Eaglecrest Drive, then we only need  look at the urban sprawl of  our neighbours in Parksville for a clear image of what Qualicum Beach would be like if we go down that road of up zoning rural parcels. The decision to go ahead with processing 850 Eaglecrest Drive proposal has already set a precedent with Council’s action to  undertake a Comprehensive  Plan for the Estate Residential Lands in the future. It is highly likely that Nenzel Road development will set a similar precedent if that is the intention of this Council. 

Another disturbing aspect of Council’s support for re-zoning rural land outside the UCB is the contradiction to  Council’s proclamation over a year ago, that OCP policies related to UCB and rural land would be respected and that residents need not worry about urban sprawl into rural areas.  The public is entitled to know Council’s true intentions when it comes to rural land and the  UCB.

How much  has it cost the taxpayers to extend  water main infrastructure  to Nenzel Road for 545 Nenzel and Pheasant Glen?

In summary, in terms of transparency, collaborative community planning and public interest, I would expect Council to be eager to engage and include the public  in these major decisions involving rezoning of rural land and diverging from the OCP before this application is moved further along in the process. 

Sincerely, 
C. Macfie
578 Maple Street
Qualicum Beach

August 12, 2020

Dear Mayor and Council,

I am writing you on behalf of the Friends of the Qualicum Beach Forest(FQBF) a group formed last spring. We are a community movement committed to protecting, restoring, enhancing, and maintaining our urban trees and forest on public and private lands in the Town of Qualicum Beach. We have as a primary goal the engagement of our community for a joint collaboration with the Town on the design and implementation of a Tree and Vegetation Management Plan, with the associated bylaws. 

This is an exciting time for us as the Town begins to consider the long awaited draft Tree and Vegetation Management Plan prepared by Jeremy Gye. I would like to make four recommendations as follows:

First, FQBF recommends that the name Tree and Vegetation Management Plan be changed to the Urban Forest Master Plan (UFMP). This would signify it is more than a tree and vegetation management plan (trees are vegetation). Rather the use of this term (UFMP) speaks to the urban forest, public and private, in a holistic sense as interconnected with all the benefits an urban forest provides. This is illustrated on page 8 of the draft plan by Gye. We recommend that the Town consider our trees as Municipal Natural Infrastructure Assets. In a submission to the mayor and council of Campbell River in November 2018 Greenways Land Trust put it this way: 

Trees provide essential municipal infrastructure functions in storm water management, air quality improvement, energy savings, property value increase, and carbon sequestration, in addition to their inherent habitat value and aesthetic for the community. Whether the tree is on City property or private property has no impact on the value of that tree.
This holistic view of an urban forest is consistent as well with the definition of the urban forest from the British Columbia Toolkit: “The total collection of trees and associated plants growing in a city or Town. It includes trees in parks and yards, along roadways and paths, and in other areas, both on public and private lands.” [1]

Use of the term UFMP would put the plan at the same level of other strategic and holistic town plans including the Official Community Plan, the Sustainability Plan, and the Waterfront Master Plan. It is noteworthy that page 40 the Town Community Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2020 explicitly states that “Qualicum Beach has not adopted an Urban Forest Master Plan.” The expectation is and has been that Qualicum Beach have an Urban Forest Master Plan explicitly so named. 

Second, the relation of the Community Climate Change Adaptation Plan 2020 to the UFMP needs to be made more explicit.  The CCCAP has nine overarching areas of focus, six of which are goals of the OCP and the UFMP including the wild/urban interface for fire, natural asset management, urban forest resilience, watershed management, invasive species and climate change integration. The UFMP needs to make explicit reference to the CCCAP which is highly supportive of the necessity of a UFMP. For example, the task force recommendations of the CCCAP noted above should be considered as part of the UFMP. 

Third, given that the Town is undergoing an update of their “Asset Management Strategy” as outlined in a document of February 5, 2020 this would be an opportunity to include our trees and urban forest as natural infrastructure assets. According to the “ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability” a global network of more than 1,750 local and regional governments committed to sustainable urban development, “A healthy urban forest is one of the only municipal capital investments that will appreciate in value over time.” [2]Trees have value. We must value our trees.
Fourth, and key to our group, is the need for the Town to clearly articulate how citizens may be engaged in the design and implementation of a UFMP and accompanying bylaws. It is the historical norm and expectation of the citizens of Qualicum Beach that in plans of this magnitude that they be involved. While we are in a Pandemic critical social functions have not been discontinued and many businesses have managed to adapt and continue their activity. We all recognize that education is a priority and we must ensure it happens even in a Pandemic. The same goes for democracy and citizen engagement. Engagement of citizens in the design of the UFMP is essential and where there is a will there must be a way.

Finally, we urge that design and approval of the Urban Forest Master Plan and the accompanying bylaws be done at the same time. Indeed, Gye’s draft plan already has significant elements of both. There is ample research on bylaws in other BC municipalities that we are willing to bring to your attention if it would facilitate the process.
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate that the Friends of the Qualicum Beach Forest sees itself as constructively engaging with the town to ensure that we get the best Urban Forest Management Plan and set of bylaws possible.   

Yours,

Jay Smith, PhD
Spokesperson for the Friends of the Qualicum Beach Forest
587 Spruce Street
Qualicum Beach
V9K 1J1
250-738-1147
 
Cc:
Arrowsmith Naturalists
Arrowsmith Parks and Land Use Council
Brown Property Preservation Society
Chartwell Residents Association
Communities Protecting Our Coast
Eaglecrest Residents Association
Mount Arrowsmith Biosphere Region
Qualicum Beach Residents Association
Qualicum Beach Streamkeepers Society
Qualicum Nature Preservation Society
Qualicum Woods Residents Association

1 http://www.toolkit.bc.ca/sites/default/files/Urbanforests_Adaptation_Guide_2012_0.pdf
2 https://www.iclei.org/  Please note that the ICLEI played a key role in the preparation of the Adaptation Plan.

This COVID-19 crisis has brought out the best in many of us.  The picture above shows Doreen, our Membership Chair, delivering some groceries to people in self isolation.  If you are able to safely go to shop, ask around and some of your neighbours are in self-isolation because they were travelling, were exposed to someone who became ill or are at prime risk for complications if they catch the disease.  Thank you Doreen for setting an example for all of us.

Mayor’s Meeting March 11, 2020

Thank you for this opportunity to speak on something that is deeply troubling to me. I have brought it up before but felt the response was canned rather than a response to my specific concerns.
My topic is
The inherent requirement of transparency for good governance in a democracy.
Why is transparency in government so important in a democracy?

• When government officials are not transparent, they can avoid being held accountable to their public. 
• They can make self-serving decisions and keep hiding their hidden agendas.
• You may protest that all your decisions are fair and just and in the interest of most citizens now and into the future. 
• The problem I have as a citizen; I have no proof and much of the observable actions I see have ignored the fervent input of your citizen, leaving me in a position of doubt and distrust. 

Ignoring Citizen Input

• I will go back to the decision the council made to hire out to the RDN, the pick up of our waste. 
  • In the public survey citizens adamantly said no to that suggestion and even said they would tolerate raised taxes. 
  • This was ignored with promises there would be no increase in cost of service when the council passed these services over to the RDN.
  • Now we have increased cost of service in the need to purchase large containers, which we don’t know where to store, and we all have the old plastic containers to dispose of. I think we will grow potatoes in ours.
• Recently the promise for a group to walk the new landing strip trail that has been clear cut. 
  • The next day the trees were gone
  • Herons nesting nearby are compromised since the disruption
  • Although I have been told the town of Qualicum Beach has taken credit for finding and safeguarding these exquisite birds on your FB page, I can’t check as I don’t use FB. 
    • I hope such a manipulative massaging of your actions has not occurred.
  • The very serious legal difficulties of disturbing the heron nests at provincial level indicates one of the many reasons our council doing things in secrecy is bad for our community.
  • Many citizens knew of these nests and could have advised you. 
  • No need for a landing strip just a trail
  • There was already a trail on the other side of the road, which perhaps you did not know about. 
• You have a community that is actively working to mitigate and to create resilience against climate change.
  • Deals made in the dark like the RR development deal is an example of you ignoring citizens concerns about trees, groundwater retention, wetlands, wildlife, and citizen social and emotional health from nature etc. 
  • Build your affordable housing in East Village or on the tennis courts which I believe are being re-located. 
  • Distribute affordable housing throughout the town 
  • Don’t clear cut mature trees as it is unnecessary. 
  • There is no right way to do the wrong thing.

I ask myself why does our council need to hide its discussions and decisions from its citizens?

• Well, I know local officials have greater vested interests based on family, friendship and business ties, that can influence their decision making, in ways out of step with what the public wants.
• There is a close alliance between lack of transparency and corruption.
• When transparency, accountability and integrity are put at the heart of local governance systems, the risks of corruption is reduced. 

Nanaimo and Parksville are both opening their in-camera meetings

• Nanaimo’s in-camera meeting information is released on a monthly basis once “confidentiality obligations” are no longer applicable
  • From our QB council, I want to know the discussions and who voted how on issues of relevance to our whole town like land decisions.
  • Nanaimo councillors acknowledge the need for openness and transparency
• I checked the videos of campaign promises from the Civic Center. 
  • Everyone of our council members promised transparency and cooperation.
• I would like to see that happen. 
• I would like to be able to have confidence in our council to have practices of good governance including transparency 

I have not heard a logical explanation why the minutes, not a summary of topics, but the minutes of a meeting cannot be released, once the need for secrecy has passed. Items like land deals and appointments to committees. I want to know the discussions, and how each councillor voted. It will help shape how I vote in the next election. I like my vote to be informed.
This town is full of knowledge, experience and skills in our engaged citizens, who have come from all over Canada from every known occupation. Use this wealth of knowledge by allowing them to be informed and involved in real ways with council to build a better town and keep the reasons we all came and stayed.

FACT SHEET:  The ‘Park” Lot 23 – West Ridge Way – Qualicum Beach  02/08/20​

A Notice to Electors of Bylaw 741 was published January 7th describing a small park land exchange in the 49 home West Ridge subdivision of Qualicum Beach, at Laburnum and Claymore Roads. In fact, the infinitely small (10 M2) land exchange is incidental to the bylaw’s true purpose, which is to sub-divide a lot previously designated for park in West Ridge and to create two new residential building lots to sell. The 10 M2 triangle of land slated for exchange is an obstacle to the proposed street frontage for one of these lots.

• The development concept plan for West Ridge presented to the Planning Advisory Committee in April 2012 included specific designated park areas.
  
• Developer presentations made to Council in May 2012 included supporting documentation and drawings describing the development and identified 3 park parcels. 
  
• QB Council approved and passed the re-zoning bylaw in July of 2012, enabling residential subdivision, but did not zone all the originally proposed park areas as park land as was planned.
  
• In July 2012, Town Planning staff advised the developer that park designation was required as a condition of final approval of the plan. Only 2 of 3 parcels were subsequently designated, excluding the largest 3rd parcel, present Lot 23, with no explanation for the alteration to the development plan
  
• The Developer was assessed development costs of $180,075.00 for the establishment of park areas. 
  
• The exclusive sales marketing Realty agency provided purchasers maps of lot layouts indicating greenspace and purchasers believed the parks to be a feature.
  
•  A planting and an irrigation system was completed on all park lands in accordance to the 2012 Landscape Plan including Lot 23 now the subject of Bylaw 741.
  
• Parks & Recreation crews have annually maintained all the landscaped areas.
  
• Only since the Notice of Bylaw 741 in January 2020, did the West Ridge owners learn that the lot (Lot 23) was not designated park, as required in it’s 2012 development approval and remained zoned a residential lot.
  

Regardless of whether the Town assigned a park designation to Lot 23 or not it was by all intentions deemed by all parties including the Town to be park until January 2020. It continues to be used by residents of West Ridge and Qualicum Beach Elementary School children as a park. The Town, through its Mayor and Council, should complete the process and designate the entire area through Bylaw as park and not proceed with this exchange.

The Process: AAP – Alternative Approval Process

Initially called a “Counter-Petition Process” and now “Alternate Approval Process”, eligible electors in the town are assumed to be in support of a bylaw unless a 10% threshold of electors submit formal ‘Electoral Response Forms’ objecting to its passing. This practice is being discontinued in many jurisdictions as it can be and is often mis-used to advance passage of bylaws under the radar of citizens most directly impacted by a bylaw. Bylaw 741 has the most impact on the 98 residents of the West Ridge subdivision, yet 801 of the entire 8000 Qualicum Residents are required to overturn the bylaw. This is fundamentally unfair and is a practice the Town can and intends to use for similar land exchanges and ultimately the sale of properties they wish to dispose of and benefit from.