DEAR EDITOR:
There are several legitimate concerns that could affect our island’s rural lifestyle which should have been more carefully considered before council issued a temporary use permit on Laura Road.
Foremost, this is not an issue of nice people. Rob Purdy and Christine Hardie, stewards of the Riley orchard, are nice people. Similarly, the neighbours are nice people. The issue is land use in residential areas and significant changes that stay with the land regardless of the people.
And the use of a TUP to get there.
Democracy is time-consuming but the process is important. Rezoning allows us time, hearings, consultations to prepare thoughtful comments before council makes decisions. Ignoring this process with a TUP because it’s “temporary” is absurd. These are not merely bylaw issues, although those too are important. This is a significant change of land use and if the cidery succeeds, it will be far more difficult to properly address legitimate concerns later.
The timeline for neighbours was short: the proposal was first tabled Feb. 22. Notice went out in the Undercurrent March 4 and letters arrived that week, just over two weeks before the matter was back for a vote on March 22.
There is no mention in the application of the size of the proposed operation – there was a brief reply in the February meeting when Rob Purdy seemed to say 50,000 litres would make the business viable.
Purdy also commented that apple growing conditions on Bowen were not ideal, comparing it to 1/20th of the typical yield in the Similkameen. The cidery, under the TUP, may import 75 per cent of the juice needed for the business. If this land was designated Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) they would be limited to importing only 50 per cent of their juice.
Environmental concerns were mentioned in the Feb. 22 staff report: “Encouraging at least 50 per cent of the fruit be produced on the lot could lower emissions related impacts of importing fruit onto Bowen Island. Increased emissions from on and off Island visitation to the cidery could be expected. With objectives outlined in both BIM’s Climate Action Strategy and the Community Energy and Emissions Plan, the growing of fruit for alcoholic beverage production does not promote food security on Bowen Island.” The March 22 staff report stated: “No direct ecological/climate impacts are expected.”
The site is seven km from Snug Cove and on the corner of two quiet cul-de-sacs, with a popular trail head at the end of Laura Road. Private vehicles will be needed for both locals and visitors, contrary to OCP objectives to reduce GHG emissions (OCP Objective 15, Policy 26) and not encouraging commercial uses that increase the use of vehicles (OCP, Objective 75).
Also, not mentioned in either staff report or any comments by council, is that one neighbour has an established horse-riding stable. There is specific mention in our OCP, Section 8.3 (social wellbeing), which says the municipality acknowledges the equestrian community’s contribution to Bowen’s unique character and will take into account its needs in future planning and in planning for roadside safety. And, OCP Objective 53 states land use planning is supposed to ensure only compatible land uses are located in a given area. Horse riding and possible drunk driving suggests problems with compatibility, an objection which was not addressed.
All agree that orchards fit any definition of agriculture. Both staff reports highlighted OCP references to “agriculture” and promoting local food security. But, the deleted mention that growing fruit for alcoholic beverage production does not promote food security is concerning.
Were this a rezoning application, the cidery would rely on OCP objective 86, mentioned in both staff reports, encouraging land use compatible with farming and agriculture, and “domestic agriculture is acceptable on any property”. The policy question that needs more discussion is what size and scale of commercial production would be considered a stretch of the OCP’s words “productive ... use.”?
Finally, there is the question of solid waste disposal. Assuming there is adequate on-site water (while water is not used to produce cider, the apples and tanks will need cleaning, and adjacent neighbourhoods regularly have stage 4 water restrictions) and assuming there is sufficient septic treatment on that five-acre property (the applicants have not asked for toilets but drinkers will want and need toilets), there remains an issue of solid waste – the apple pulp. Purdy described how last year they laid the pulp on the ground and the deer were “happy” with the “feast.” Everyone at that first meeting smiled at the idea and there was no further discussion. The neighbours raised questions but again the issue was not addressed. You cannot feed horses, another ruminant, a lot of sugary apples or carrots without their getting profoundly sick. Such is one of the very good reasons why it is illegal to feed wildlife.
This TUP has been issued but in my opinion its process and content were markedly flawed. I am concerned about the function of staff in helping council navigate a huge volume of material. Councillors could not manage typically 300-page meeting agendas without staff summaries and recommendations. Planners’ training is to outline conflicts between a proposal and legislation so that council can make the best informed decisions on our behalf. So why, when there were numerous serious objections to a proposal, would a TUP proceed? Support letters outnumbered those with concerns, but most were simple one line “yes” responses. Surely the neighbours’ thoughtful concerns, on issues other than merely bylaw matters, should have trumped the far less informed, however enthusiastic, at least to the extent that the matter defaulted to a rezoning application.
There was insufficient reference to our guiding documents. It seems there is a basic lack of understanding of what we are trying to protect, and the need to not change land use unless we fully appreciate the possible long-term effects.
A TUP “to help develop viability” is putting the cart well before the horse.
Judi Gedye
