The QUALICUM Beach Residents Association is hosting an All Candidates Meeting on Tuesday, October 2nd at the Civic Centre starting at 7 pm. After introductory statements and some general questions, it will be opened to written questions from the floor and, if time permits, oral questions. Please let all your friends and neighbours know about this meeting as it is one of the few chances to meet all the candidates and get some idea of their views on civic concerns.
|
Section Head September 2, 2018
Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resources Operations Rural Development 142 – 2080 Labiuex Road Nanaimo, BC V9T 6J9 sent via electronic mail Dear Sir or Madam: This letter is being sent on behalf of the Qualicum Beach Residents’ Association Board of Directors regarding the Disposition of Crown Land File #1414799, the application from the Town of Qualicum Beach. By unanimous vote, the Board requested this letter to express our strong opposition to the disposition of the Crown Land in question to facilitate proposed works by the Town at the intersection of Memorial Avenue and Highway 19A. It is our understanding the Town request is to enable four components:
We would also like to make clear we support the use of roundabouts as a respected method for many, but not all intersections. This intersection is not appropriate for a roundabout. It is an intersection with entry and exit points in close proximity serving the gas station and resort motel. It is an intersection with high pedestrian traffic as it is used for beach access. Add to this mix a relatively high use of cyclists with Town plans to enhance this use by building dedicated cyclist lanes. There was a pedestrian fatality near this intersection several years ago. In response, the Town installed a pedestrian activated cross walk-signalized light. We believe if the Town determines the need to further improve this intersection, it should be done with traffic lights. This would not require intrusion of Crown Land. A recent petition was circulated in protest of building the roundabout. To be clear, the 875 signatories were only protesting the roundabout – not the elements to improve Town infrastructure or protect and enhance our environment. We urge you to carefully consider the motivation for the Town’s application request and to reject that request as an unnecessary and undesired use of Crown Land. Respectfully , Lance R. Nater President, Qualicum Beach Residents’ Association Section Head
Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resources Operations Rural Development 142 – 2080 Labiuex Road Nanaimo, BC V9T 6J9 (sent via electronic mail) Dear Section Head September 2, 2018 I am writing to voice my concerns, observations, and opposition to the application submitted by the Town of Qualicum Beach: Disposition of Crown Land File #1414799. At the outset I will say that I support the general concerns off enhancing the Beach Creek estuary with improved stormwater outflow, and increasing resiliency to extreme weather events. However in 1.1 of the Management Plan (MP) it’s stated that; “This project is primarily for ecological benefit.” This is a fundamentally misleading characterization of this project. The scope and extent of the applicant’s incursion into into the Crown intertidal zone is completely predicated on accommodating the construction of a new roundabout at this intersection. I find the fact that there is not one mention of the new roundabout in the whole Management Plan to be a failure of public disclosure on the part of the applicant. It should be noted for the record that there has been no public consultation between the Town and residents regarding this proposal. Notwithstanding my previous points, I have the following concerns regarding the Management Plan: 1.2 Investigative Work - The applicant states that : The public is strongly supportive of improving the Town’s shoreline to a natural beach profile..” The scale of the application is dictated by the roundabout and results in construction of a very large artificial headland that intrudes well seaward of the current natural boundary. This rock and boulder headland will not be seen by residents as consistent with the “natural beach profile” in the least. 1.4 First Nations Consultation - The Town has undertaken no consultation of public record with the local Qualicum First Nations Band regarding this application, despite this coastline being part of their ancestral home. This would appear to be a fundamental omission of public process necessary for the Crown to be assured that this project has broad based public interest. 4.1.2 Soil Disturbance - It is not clear to me how the Town can state there is no “potential for disturbance of archaeological, paleontological fossils or historical artifacts”. The Town has records on file indicating that this stretch of coastline has a number of locations where archeological sites have been identified. 4.1.3 Riparian Encroachment - The extent of the proposed riparian encroachment is not warranted for habitat enhancement purposes and extreme weather resiliency, but rather a requirement of accommodating a traffic circle. 4.1.5 Visual Impacts - The seaward extension of the rock headland will significantly alter the visual character of this stretch of the Qualicum Beach shoreline. The shallow sloping sand flats of Qualicum’s beach are a major attraction to summer residents and tourists. No material has been submitted by the Town that indicate that visual impacts from nearby properties and from the beach have been considered. The rock headland will be the only man made structure extending significantly beyond the natural shoreline in all of Qualicum Beach. As such, this alteration to the natural shoreline should have been put before the public for comment prior to being submitted to the Crown for approval. 4.1.6 Archaeological Sites - It is not clear to me how the Town can state there is no “potential for disturbance of archaeological, paleontological fossils or historical artifacts”. The Town has records on file indicating that this stretch of coastline has a number of locations where archeological sites have been identified. - An AIA should have been conducted as part of the Town’s efforts to prove ‘due process’ to it’s residents, and to address the subject of ‘archaeological sites’ with some degree of third party professional assurance. 5.1.1 Land Management Plans and Regional Growth Strategies - The applicant states: “Town of Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan: Strongly supportive of proposed project.” - Residents familiar with the Town’s OCP and The Waterfront Master Plan, could easily take issue with this contention. While the environmental goals of the application are consistent with the Town’s OCP and Waterfront Master Plan, the inclusion of a roundabout clearly contradicts major goals of those documents. Both documents state a priority on reducing traffic flows, and enhanced pedestrian and cyclist safety and access. Without public consultation that has affirmed that the proposal is compatible with our OCP, the Town’s claim must be seen as without foundation. I will summarize in stating:
Section Head
Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resources Operations Rural Development 142 - 2080 Labiuex Rd Nanaimo, BC V9T 6J9 Regarding the Disposition of Crown Land File #1414799, application from Town of Qualicum Beach. I wish to oppose this application only in regard to the addition of the proposed roundabout included in this application for this license. There is absolutely no requirement for this roundabout at this location. To my knowledge there has never been an accident at this T intersection. This is our namesake, our beach area and the proximity to a hotel, limited parking and a gas station make this undertaking of a roundabout a disaster waiting to happen, not-withstanding the history of roundabouts. I do not oppose the application for the work required for re-establishment of the estuary and foreshore, sanitary sewer upgrade, bike path and retaining wall that this License is required to carry out the work on the foreshore to re-establish the estuary, enhancement of Beach Creek and increase resiliency to foreshore erosion. I went door to door in Eaglecrest here in Qualicum Beach. The residents are not in support of this proposed roundabout. On the whole, in the community I was able to garner 875 signatures that oppose the construction of a roundabout at this location. We suggest that should a license be granted, it should be only for the re-establishment of the estuary and foreshore, sanitary sewer upgrade, bike path and retaining wall. I know the residents associations here in the community are also non-supportive of this roundabout. Please take this into consideration prior to issuing a license to the Town. Respectfully submitted Joseph E. Dennie 960 Royal Dornoch Drive Qualicum Beach, BC V9K 1E1 289 816 2411 Ps: I am copying 137 parties in this community for FYI. Dear Mr. Mayor and Councillors,
I am writing this letter on behalf of the Qualicum Beach Residents’ Association board of directors. As a result of several lengthy discussions by the directors and fielding many questions from our members and the general public, we have very serious reservations about the logic and cost benefit of the proposed roundabout. We realize this opinion comes late in the process, long after a grant of $1.4 million was announced. Nevertheless, based on what we know and from the comments we have heard, we cannot support this project as it has been presented. We regard a grant as a redistribution of taxpayer funds and do no believe acquiring a grant should, in itself, justify this or any other project. It is our view that the proposed redesign of the 19A and Memorial intersection to a roundabout is not an improvement in vehicle or pedestrian movement. The location and entry/exit of the Shell station is a significant obstacle. We do not believe this proposed redesign was suitably explained to the general public. Dave Golson served on the Waterfront working committee and does not recall the roundabout being discussed to any extent. I served on the Public Safety Committee and do not recall any discussion about converting the subject intersection to a roundabout. The QBRA board is not opposed to roundabouts. We are opposed to this proposed application at a three way intersection. This opinion was unanimous among our seven board members. In reading the Town announcement of the grant, it highlights key improvements that will result. This is a well used pedestrian intersection. Based on our observations with the Rupert/Memorial roundabout, we do not think safety for cyclists or pedestrians would be improved. Many of the other infrastructure,transportation and environmental gains, we believe, could be realized without a roundabout at this site. The underground work necessary could all be accomplished without a roundabout. Traffic calming for the beachfront would be no more effective then the Rupert roundabout where speeds along Memorial are not impaired. Clearly, the directors of the QBRA board and many members of the general public do not understand what the merits of this roundabout are and by not understanding, they are very much opposed. We strongly suggest the Town take a step back to justify this roundabout to the general public. Based on our experience, either the Town has failed to make a convincing justification to residents or the design is of very questionable merit. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Lance Nater President, QBRA Dear Mr. Mayor and Councillors,
I am writing this letter on behalf of the Qualicum Beach Residents’ Association board of directors. As a result of several lengthy discussions by the directors and fielding many questions from our members and the general public, we have very serious reservations about the logic and cost benefit of the proposed roundabout. We realize this opinion comes late in the process, long after a grant of $1.4 million was announced. Nevertheless, based on what we know and from the comments we have heard, we cannot support this project as it has been presented. We regard a grant as a redistribution of taxpayer funds and do no believe acquiring a grant should, in itself, justify this or any other project. It is our view that the proposed redesign of the 19A and Memorial intersection to a roundabout is not an improvement in vehicle or pedestrian movement. The location and entry/exit of the Shell station is a significant obstacle. We do not believe this proposed redesign was suitably explained to the general public. Dave Golson served on the Waterfront working committee and does not recall the roundabout being discussed to any extent. I served on the Public Safety Committee and do not recall any discussion about converting the subject intersection to a roundabout. The QBRA board is not opposed to roundabouts. We are opposed to this proposed application at a three way intersection. This opinion was unanimous among our seven board members. In reading the Town announcement of the grant, it highlights key improvements that will result. This is a well used pedestrian intersection. Based on our observations with the Rupert/Memorial roundabout, we do not think safety for cyclists or pedestrians would be improved. Many of the other infrastructure,transportation and environmental gains, we believe, could be realized without a roundabout at this site. The underground work necessary could all be accomplished without a roundabout. Traffic calming for the beachfront would be no more effective then the Rupert roundabout where speeds along Memorial are not impaired. Clearly, the directors of the QBRA board and many members of the general public do not understand what the merits of this roundabout are and by not understanding, they are very much opposed. We strongly suggest the Town take a step back to justify this roundabout to the general public. Based on our experience, either the Town has failed to make a convincing justification to residents or the design is of very questionable merit. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Lance Nater President, QBRA A woman was attacked Friday, March 9, 2018, about 8:30pm on Hoylake Road West.
She was walking up Hoylake from Arbutus. She passed a man at the corner of Arbutus and Hoylake Road West who was smoking a joint. He followed her and pushed her down to the ground. She fell to the ground in front of 423 Hoylake Road West. She screamed and he then tried to cover her mouth, Then he ran off. The man is about 5'6" or 5'7" tall. Dark brown hair. Also has a mustache. He was wearing a plaid shirt, puffy vest and jeans. He spoke with an accent. If you have any information or do see this man, please contact the RCMP. Latest FORA Health Update following meeting with Island Health representatives.( Dr Drew Digney, Executive Medical Director NRGH and Shelley Gallant Director OHC). We meet quarterly.
NRGH- Greater use of Operating rooms in winter and less in summer to accommodate seasonal demands of both staff and patients. Electronic record system under government review with our area being the pilot area, not to be expanded elsewhere at this time. New Government- More focus on mental health, addictions, community services and less on hip and knee surgeries Wait times for Tests CT Scan MRI Ultrasound Urgent 1 day 1 day 2 days ASAP 20 days 18 days 15 days Semi Urgent 121 days 118 days 30 days Routine 195 days 180 days 155 days Oceanside Health Centre- Urgent Care visits still averaging 68/ day. Complex care patients to be seen in 4 hours or less and simple cases in 2 with success rate of 90 and 80% respectively. Financial compensation plan is working well here for the staff. Primary Care seeing 730 appointments per month using 3 salaried nurse practitioners backed by urgent care doctors only when required. They have 1800 patients with 25 added per month. At this rate their fee equates to that just below the lowest GP fee.The use of NP's province wide is being studied by the government. The search for primary care doctors is still ongoing with a reviewed pay scale to be put in place with a plan of 3 or 4 eventually expanding services to 7 day week, 12 hour days. 14 Heart patients seen per day via the ECHO programme. OHC has 2 psychiatrists. Local health authorities being subdivided to better care for local demands. No plans for any expansion at OHC. Telehealth and home care monitoring available now for certain patients with geriatric, psychiatric, ms, heart and copd issues. FORA questioned how these services were advertised to the public and local docs? End of Life- 6th hospice bed added at Trillium Lodge with 75% occupancy rate and average19 day stay. Now supported 24/7 by RN, LPN and health care aid at night. Medically Assisted Deaths(MAiD)- 25 in Oceanside, 355 on VI over 18 months. Only 1 local doctor with patients having to go outside of the area. Residential Care Beds - total of 378 in Parksville with 53 assisted living, 3 respite, 6 end of life. - total of 225 in Qualicum Beach, 30 assisted living. - total of 848 in Nanaimo, 98 assisted living, 2 respite. There are no plans for any new beds which take 4 to 5 years to put in place. It seems our Town Council, with a 3 -2 vote has decided to ban future buildings from applying “adults only” age restrictions. If adopted by Council on January 29, our Town will be the only municipality in Canada imposing such a ban.
The arguments made to support this ban include comments such as,”…this will demonstrate to young families and those with children that they really are welcome to live in Qualicum Beach.” “We need to change the demographics and this will help.” Somehow it is thought this action will “free up” more housing for younger people. Other Council members stated it would be good for all of us to co-mingle generations in future housing. CHEK NEWS briefly covered this subject and took a survey among viewers. Do you favour a municipality banning age restricted housing, yes or no. Of the 761 votes received, 66% were opposed to the idea and 34% were in favour. Despite the fact that Councillor Horner offered a notice of motion on this subject in July 2017, to my knowledge Council made no effort to use the OCP process or the Quality of Life Survey to get a better sense of public opinion. Five residents spoke at the public hearing stating their opposition to the amendment. Council asked no questions. It seems that the Town has become so preoccupied with wanting to alter demographics that it is prepared to discriminate against seniors who would prefer to live with others of their generation. It should be noted that the Town is basing their youth and family retention strategy on a study done nine years ago. The authors were primarily employed by the School District and the report was done at the height of uncertainty over the future of KSS. If adopted on January 29, this bylaw will essentially freeze age-defined housing in Qualicum Beach to that which exists today. If you are looking forward to living and perhaps retiring to a building that welcomes families and children and if you have no problem with Councillors limiting your choices of how you may live, then you have no problem. You are among the 34% in the CHEK poll. On the other hand, if you feel this amendment is an over-reach of Council authority that limits your freedom of choice as a property owner or strata member and contradicts senior adult human rights, you should be concerned. You are among the 66% in the CHEK poll. After lengthy discussion of the pros and cons, the seven QBRA board members voted 5 opposed, 1 in favour, and 1 undecided. If you have an opinion you should make it known to Town staff. Lance Nater |
AuthorMembers and friends of QBRA are invited to write blogs on our site. Contact badkins@shaw.ca Archives
July 2019
Categories |
RSS Feed