A representative for developers of a large subdivision at Brew Bay, near Lang Creek, has requested that qathet Regional District put a pause on the legislative process.
At the March 25 planning committee meeting, regional district directors considered a recommendation for the 46-lot phased bare land strata property, which indicated the applicant provides dedicated parkland for the area identified on the proposed plan of subdivision prepared by Polaris Land Surveying, dated February 4, 2025, and pays cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication in the amount of 1.62 per cent of the total land value, calculated in accordance with section 510 of the Local Government Act.
At the April 30 planning committee meeting, Polaris land surveyor Michael Rogers appeared before the planning committee and said the purpose of his delegation was for the subdivision applications to be tabled by the regional district.
“There’s a couple of reasons for this,” said Rogers. “It’s worth mentioning that it is unfortunate that we have got to this point. For us to come and say we want to table something – we want to delay it – that’s pretty rare.”
Rogers said there were two reasons for the request being made. The first reason pertained to questions raised regarding section 478 of the Local Government Act. Section 478 is related to official community plans (OCP), stating that an official community plan does not commit or authorize a municipality, regional district or improvement district to proceed with any project specified in the plan.
Rogers said in two reports that the developers have, one of the options is cash can be taken in lieu of parkland during the subdivision process. He said section 478, along with section 510, deals with parkland and how the decisions between park and cash are dealt with.
“We’re just not there yet in understanding the procedural fairness, nor the legality of cash being taken instead of land, as being an option,” said Rogers. “In addition to section 478, there is a publication the province put out, which is a parkland acquisition best practices guide. This is a provincial publication that provides local governments and landowners with some guidance of how to apply section 510, and how to make decisions about cash or parkland.”
Rogers said section 510 states that in general, the landowner should expect to provide or dedicate locations where park has been identified in the neighbourhood plan, or referenced in other land use planning documents. Where future park locations are not identified or referenced in planning documents, it is reasonable for owners to expect to contribute cash-in-lieu, the section stated.
“We have an OCP that clearly identifies lands adjacent to Lang Creek as park,” said Rogers.
Rogers said the developers have sought legal advice.
“Because of these questions, my client is needing more time,” said Rogers. “The options we are having to entertain now have diverged to a point where design is affected and different parties are affected. We need some time.”
Rogers said what is wanted is something that works for everyone.
Electoral Area B director Mark Gisborne said the property is designated in the OCP as parkland, and as he understands it, the applicant is offering parkland.
“If we were to go with accepting the parkland, do you still want that to be tabled?” asked Gisborne. “I like land more than cash.”
Electoral Area A director and planning committee chair Jason Lennox said his understanding was that the applicants were not rescinding the application but were just asking for more time.
Rogers said that was correct.
City of Powell River director Cindy Elliott said the property in question is close to people’s hearts. She said where some of the options are coming from include public use of the beach and facilitating that. She added that people are worried about access.
“It is a good idea to take some time to have some conversations about how that might work,” said Elliott. “As soon as you build a road and have a residential neighbourhood, it will be impacted by people trying to use the beach. Some overall collaborative conversations about how public use and enjoyment of the beach is going to work post-development will help move all these decisions.”
Rogers said the developers need a month. Lennox said the regional district would not hold the developers to a date.
“We all understand the intent,” said Lennox, “ and we all want to work together as soon as possible.”
Join the Peak's email list for the top headlines right in your inbox Monday to Friday.
