The Week - November 26

A question of rights

Life only grows more complicated for Bob Evans and his development partners in their quest to build a waterfront parking lot for the yachts of the rich in Victoria’s harbour.

This week, the Save Our Harbour group produced a legal opinion concerning who holds riparian rights (the right of landowners to reasonably access adjacent bodies of water) to portions of the waterfront at the Royal Quays condominiums where Evan wants to build his marina. And contrary to what events so far might suggest, it isn’t just Evans’ company Community Marine Concepts.

The opinion from the Vancouver law firm Lawson Lundell concludes, “ . . . we are of the view that the owners of Strata Plan VIS3900 and VIS1889 hold certain riparian rights to portions of the water in front of those developments. Those rights should not be ignored by the Provincial Crown, the City of Victoria or the developer of the marina.”

Audrey Whittall, speaking on behalf of Save Our Harbour, says the ball is now in the court of the respective strata corporations to decide whether they want to exercise those rights.

“That material has been turned over to the two strata corporations, so it is now for them to decide what they ultimately want to do on it,” says Whittall. “I think at this point in time they are probably waiting to see what happens with all of the other permissions that [the developers are] asking for.”

Until now, it seemed both the developers and the province’s Integrated Lands Management Bureau believed riparian rights on the subject properties were a non-issue. With the Lawson Lundell opinion in hand, that could all be about to change.

City dives in

Add to Evans’ woes the fact the City of Victoria has finally decided to grow some spikes and say what it thinks about the Victoria International Marina plan.

In an October 27 letter to the province’s Integrated Land Management Bureau, City of Victoria corporate administrator Rob Woodland writes, “In the City’s view: a) a marina in this location would significantly diminish the natural marine area fronting Lime Bay Park; and b) would significantly diminish the public’s enjoyment of Lime Bay Park, including but not limited to, the views enjoyed by the public across the water surface.”

The letter goes on to say “it is difficult to see how the riparian right of access to and from the City’s property could not be adversely affected by the proposed development” and concludes with, “As far as the City is aware, the riparian rights issue has not been resolved, and certainly the City has not provided its consent to the proposed grant of any tenure directly in front of Lime Bay Park.”

No matter Evans’ political connections, these emerging riparian rights issue on the subject properties could tie this proposal up for years to come.

Pointed criticism

Last week we told you members of VIHA’s Victoria Needle Exchange Advisory Committee were upset at the unceremonious end to their committee’s existence following VIHA’s surprise decision to abandon the search for a fixed-site needle-exchange. The eight community members on the committee recently submitted a letter to B.C. health minister Kevin Falcon and the province’s chief medical health officer Perry Kendall that read, in part, “We are pleased VIHA endorses a distributed Model. However, a distributed model of secondary exchanges cannot replace the ancillary services offered at a fixed site exchange, which include nursing, referral to detox and drug treatment services, education on safer substance use and reducing disease transmission, and much needed social capital.”

The former advisory committee members also used the letter to decry what they perceive as VIHA’s clumsy approach to public consultation that requires an okay from the VIHA board of directors.

But VIHA public health director Shannon Turner says clearance from VIHA brass is necessary, lest they waste people’s time.

“I think that [VIHA CEO] Howard [Waldner] wanted support from the board for Princess Avenue, and it wouldn’t go to the board without executive approval, and as I say, that process was preempted by the media attention and the exposure of the site,” says Turner. “I honestly believe it’s important to value volunteer time, and value the time of residents and neighbours, so we’re not going to be frivolous about engaging a community in discourse, unless we’re serious about moving ahead.”

The needle exchange committee members, however, say that’s just a recipe for wasted time.

“We believe this policy will inevitably result in a build-up of concerns, fears and negativity while staff waits for the go-ahead to consult with neighbours in any area where a potential site is identified,” wrote the former committee members.

(See Monday’s online letters page to read the letter in its entirety.)

Beware of falling trees

The Western Canadian Wilderness Committee revealed this week that TimberWest continues to log second-growth trees in the vicinity of the Muir Creek Watershed, which the CRD has cited as a prime candidate for a regional park.

Environmental groups are calling for an immediate end to the logging and for the company to work with the CRD toward establishing a park in the area.

—Jason Youmans