There were about 30 people at my Open House on May 6. It was a great discussion and pretty well everyone contributed, if not in words, certainly with their attention. Thanks to those who came out. You’ve renewed my faith in our community’s ability to discuss complex problems.
I started by asking if there were any questions about anything other than the park, and there were comments about the Multi-Use Path. There’s too much asphalt, and one wondered if there were alternatives with more permeability. The width and blankness were also mentioned.
I’ve heard from others that the entrance to Bowen is now 6 lanes of tarmac. Cyclists commented that in the Cove, it was much safer to get cyclists off the road once cars started to unload, but that there are other surfaces that could work as well. In hindsight, I’m wondering if this could be referred to the Advisory Design Committee, since we have one!
The remainder of the Open House was devoted to Metro’s Cape Roger Curtis proposal. Transportation is a major concern. There was discussion about the need for BC Ferries to provide passenger-only ferries ASAP. I gave a brief description of what I’d recently learned about the 4 levels of the BCF bureaucracy and how Bowen might get more involved. Also that there were funding problems for research and development, but we plan to pitch the concern to M.P. Patrick Weiler during his visit.
There was a question about whether this council was bound by the actions of the last council and whether camping was a “done deal”. The only thing that is final is a contract between the purchaser and the seller. There is nothing Bowen can do about that agreement other than encourage or discourage. A few weeks ago we thought Metro might walk away from the contract, so some of us decided to encourage. We believe there is a common interest in preserving the land, but beyond that, we are unable, and some of us are unwilling, to promise anything.
There were subsequent closed meetings and no detailed information beyond the decision to complete the purchase. Every elected government has the right, and in some cases the obligation, to conduct limited kinds of business in closed meetings. Open discussions could give unfair advantages, or disclose confidential legal advice that could jeopardize enforcement, or hiring, firing or promotion discussions could disclose private information.
First reading of a rezoning bylaw was raised. Metro applied in late January for rezoning to allow for camping and that application was referred to several of our committees, which have all asked for more and better information. In addition, our staff wrote a FIRST DRAFT of a bylaw, which BEGINS a process. However, that process is on hold until we get more information from Metro.
Bowen residents and our council have made it clear to Metro that there are a number of significant problems that must be addressed. The current zoning allows Metro to use the land as a “passive park” – the same as Crippen (trails, signs). There was a question about tax revenue from a park, and there is none. There was mention of 4 different categories of park with #4 having the least traffic, and a question if CRC could be rezoned to that designation. I had not heard of the different categories and was unable to comment, but will try to find out more.
There was considerable discussion about the lack of emergency resources, preparation and planning by both Metro and Bowen, given the interest that has already been generated. It is anticipated that next week, Metro will issue a press release with a welcoming message and there’s nothing in place to help or protect Bowen this summer. We need to figure out ways to recalibrate visitor expectations.
One resident described how his life’s work had been to help multiple stakeholders with complex problems find ways to deal with uncertainty and effectively collaborate. First and foremost would be to agree on a common purpose and agree to proceed incrementally, but not with any “final” plan as the goal. So much was unknown and could easily change or need to change. Rather small steps with testing, learning and adapting, as some steps became successful. A fundamental goal would be to build trust.
A former council member emphasized that being able to talk to each other is also fundamental. We were asked if there was evidence that Metro was willing to engage with Bowen. Tim Wake replied that he was encouraged with considerable responses from Metro. A referendum was discussed briefly: it is still an option but carefully designing a clear question, timing, cost, and campaigning make it far from a simple resource.
There was a comment that local discussions are not focusing enough on the environment and we need more baseline information. I said that I believe that is one of Metro’s strengths and we should encourage their research and staffing for a detailed inventory.
Fire is a serious, existential threat to Bowen, especially on the south shore, and there was a worry that Metro may plan to “chip away” at resistance or wait for a more sympathetic council, and we need to come together and stipulate how to build in much stronger protective measures. Metro’s responses to date are woefully insufficient. Overall, we need to more effectively manage visitors, and in particular, there is little information or planning about day visitors which has already become a noticeable problem.
We ended with the idea that while Bowen needed to be “hard-nosed” when negotiating with Metro, at the same time we must be respectful of each other.
Next Open House is Saturday, June 3, 2023 at 3 pm at Collins Hall.
