Comox Valley Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw No. 120, 2010

From: Comox Valley Conservation Strategy Steering Committee

To: Geoff Garbutt

Date: August 10, 2010

---

Executive Summary (ES)

ES 1: Overview

The Comox Valley Conservation Strategy Steering Committee hopes the RGS can balance the needs of humans with the environment. A careful analysis of the RGS shows that the document provides a wealth of valuable information, a clear vision and a clear set of goals and objectives, including those that promote conservation. However, the document contains conflicting and inconsistent policies. If these policies are amended, the balance between human needs and the environment can be achieved. This submission provides our analysis and proposes amendments to strengthen the RGS so the opportunity to strike a balance will not be missed.

ES 2: Introduction

The Comox Valley Conservation Strategy steering committee is supported by and made up of representatives from 13 local environmental and resident association organizations. Our input throughout the process has focused primarily on the content of Goal 2: Ecosystems, Natural Areas and Parks. This submission provides additional input on Part 4: Growth Management and Part 5: Implementation and Monitoring.

ES 3: The Consulting Process

The consulting process had been effective up to the release of the draft RGS in June. The consultation process is now being driven by a timeline that does not allow for an effective and inclusive process to occur. At this critical time the community should be encouraged to read and carefully reflect on the RGS, and the long term implications for the Comox Valley. Instead, the RGS has been rushed to the public hearing stage with the goal of completing 3rd reading by the end of August. The opportunity to engage community to shape the RGS is being lost.

ES 4: Goal 2: Ecosystems, Natural Areas and Parks

Protect, steward and enhance the natural environment and ecological connections and systems.

In a letter to the Chair of the Comox Strathcona Regional District, Page 2, from Ida Chong, B.C. Minister of Community Services, July 13, 2007, the RGS was mandated by the provincial government to have “a very strong environmental focus." The goal, objectives, supporting text and policies outlined in Goal 2: Ecosystems, Natural Areas and Parks, if implemented, will
improve the environmental impact of development and lead to better land use planning and growth management in the Comox Valley. With some amendments and additions to strengthen policies and provide for more effective implementation, the RGS can deliver on the mandate for "a very strong environmental focus.”

We would like to show our support for the following key elements of the Goal 2 section:

• Recognition that human impact has had negative impacts on the environment for the last 150 years.
• Recognition that gaps in environmental information and knowledge has led to the loss of natural areas and natural resource productivity.
• Recognition that growth management must be rooted in the environmental principles of connectivity, precaution and restoration.
• Identification and inclusion of critical ecological areas including sensitive ecosystems, critical watersheds, riparian areas, estuaries and biodiversity corridors as conservation areas that need to be protected.
• Identification of the need to understand and protect natural and formative systems.
• Recognition of NGOs as an important part of the community and encouragement of information sharing between local government, environmental and community organizations.
• Application of a regional approach to solving problems by all local governments, elected representatives and staff. We applaud this approach as an effective way to address environmental issues and implement regional conservation planning as outlined in Nature Without Borders .

We have a number of concerns that need to be addressed to strengthen this section of the RGS. We have proposed policy amendments for this section on pages 5-7 of this submission.

Our amendments address the following concerns:

• Improved protection for second growth forests and seasonally flooded agricultural land
• Stronger direction to implement actions outlined in policies to address gaps in environmental information and knowledge.
• Stronger direction for OCPs to adopt consistent regional definitions and guidelines for conservation areas and to create region-wide linkages.
• Requirements for all new developments to:
  • improve or expand conservation areas and provide for linkages between them
  • protect or enhance natural systems and ecosystem functioning by identifying and working with natural and formative systems and landscape forms and features.
• Ensuring appropriate buffers and transition zones are in place adjacent to conservation areas to minimize impacts from development.

ES 5: Inconsistencies within the RGS

The first three parts of the RGS contain valuable information, a clear vision and a set of regional goals and policies that direct the future land use decisions by all local governments. It shows that a great deal of work and consideration of public input went into this part of the RGS.

The last two parts of the RGS document, however, do not reflect the same care and consideration found in the first 3 parts. There are inconsistencies in parts 4 & 5 with the goals, objectives and policies outlined in the first 3 parts. Our submission addresses these inconsistencies and proposes amendments to correct them.

ES 6: Managing Growth (RGS Part 4)

In this Part of the RGS the proposed Municipal Expansion Areas (MEAs) are at odds with the information, goals and policies outlined in the first 3 parts- specifically densification of the core municipalities which are to accommodate 90 % of population growth. The MEAs have been identified in part 4 of the RGS as areas to accommodate "potential growth." If implemented the MEAs will result in land speculation, increase pressure for development of existing natural areas and ecosystems (greenfield development) and lead to urban sprawl. These MEAs should be removed from the RGS.

We have proposed amendments to Part 4 that are outlined on pages 8-10 of this submission.

ES 7: Monitoring and Implementation (RGS Part 5)

This part of the RGS outlines a process for amending the RGS. The proposed process does not promote transparency and public consultation. This could lead to divisive future growth management decisions, community conflict and public cynicism. Specific concerns with the RGS amendment process include:

• Public hearing process is optional rather than mandatory
• Little or no option for public consultation on proposed amendments
• Major revisions such as creating municipal expansion areas not already identified on the RGS maps are allowed to go through as "minor amendments."

To improve the RGS amendment process and address our concerns we propose that this part be amended. The changes we propose would require the RGS amendment process to:

• require all amendments to follow the standard amendment process,
• include a mandatory public hearing, and
• ensure public consultation occur before 1st and 2nd reading.

For more specific information regarding amendments to part 5 see page 11 of this submission.

Full Submission with Proposed Amendments:
Comox Valley Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw No. 120, 2010

1.0 Overview

The Comox Valley Conservation Strategy Steering Committee hopes the RGS can balance the needs of humans with the environment. A careful analysis of the RGS shows that the document provides a wealth of valuable information, a clear vision and a clear set of goals and objectives, including those that promote conservation. However, the document contains conflicting and inconsistent policies. If these policies are amended, the balance between human needs and the environment can be achieved. This submission provides our analysis and proposes amendments to strengthen the RGS so the opportunity to strike a balance will not be missed.

2.0 Introduction:

The Comox Valley Conservation Strategy steering committee is supported by and made up of representatives from 13 local environmental and resident association organizations. We have participated in the development of the RGS over the last 12 months, through the public consulting process, and have had meetings with both the Urban Strategies consultants and the CVRD staff. Our input throughout the process has focused primarily on the content of Goal 2: Ecosystems, Natural Areas and Parks. This submission provides additional input on Part 4: Growth Management and Part 5: Implementation and Monitoring.

3.0 The Consulting Process

The consulting process had been effective up to the release of the draft RGS in June. The consultation process is now being driven by a timeline that does not allow for an effective and inclusive process to occur. At this critical time the community should be encouraged to read and carefully reflect on the RGS, and the long term implications for the Comox Valley. Instead, the RGS has been rushed to the public hearing stage with the goal of completing 3rd reading by the end of August. The opportunity to engage community to shape the RGS is being lost.

4.0 Goal 2: Ecosystems, Natural Areas and Parks

Protect, steward and enhance the natural environment and ecological connections and systems. The RGS was mandated in 2007 by the provincial government to have "a very strong environmental focus." (Letter to the Chair of the Comox Strathcona Regional District, Page 2, from Ida Chong, B.C. Minister of Community Services, July 13, 2007). The goal, objectives, supporting text and policies outlined in Goal 2: Ecosystems, Natural Areas and Parks, if implemented, will lessen the environmental impact of development and lead to better land use planning and growth management in the Comox Valley. With some amendments and additions to strengthen policies and provide for more effective implementation, the RGS can deliver on the mandate for "a very strong environmental focus."

We would like to show our support for the following key elements of the Goal 2 section:

• Recognition that human impact has had negative impacts on the environment for the last 150 years.
• Recognition that gaps in environmental information and knowledge has led to the loss of natural areas and natural resource productivity.
• Recognition that growth management must be rooted in the environmental principles of connectivity, precaution and restoration.
• Identification and inclusion of critical ecological areas including sensitive ecosystems, critical watersheds, riparian areas, estuaries and biodiversity corridors as conservation areas that need to be protected.
• Identification of the need to understand and protect natural and formative systems.
• Recognition of NGOs as an important part of the community and encouragement of information sharing between local government, environmental and community organizations.
• Application of a regional approach to solving problems by all local governments, elected representatives and staff. We applaud this approach as an effective way to address environmental issues and implement regional conservation planning as outlined in Nature Without Borders .

4.1 Proposed Amendments

We have made a number of policy amendments that address our concerns and strengthen the Goal 2 section of the RGS. Our amendments address the following concerns:

RGS page 33 – Objective 2-A: Identify and Map Areas for Conservation

Rationale:
The RGS acknowledges that in the Comox Valley loss of environmentally sensitive areas has occurred as a direct result of land use decisions being made, and practices undertaken, without proper environmental information and knowledge (p. 33). In order to improve growth management decisions the RGS has set an objective 2-A to: "Identify and map areas for conservation."

The supporting policies for Objective 2-A, if implemented, provide a set of practical actions that would successfully close the environmental information and knowledge gap. However, the policies do not provide strong enough direction to ensure that these actions will be implemented. Therefore, we are requesting that the supporting policies on p.35 be amended to replace the action words such as "should be considered," "are encouraged," "should adopt" with the word will.

Proposed RGS Amendment:

2A-1 Local governments will adopt regionally consistent terminology, as set out above, to create a policy framework to support protection of conservation areas, environmental features and watersheds in OCPs. (TYPO: missing word, add areas after conservation)

[This policy amendment is in line with motions passed by the CVRD in July 2008, and by municipalities in June 2008]

2A-2 All local governments will regularly update environmental mapping. This will facilitate the production of mapping that depicts critical information such as sensitive ecosystems, watercourses and riparian areas, parks and greenways, and working landscapes including ALR.

2A-4 OCP updates will include mapping of regional environmental features.

2A-5 Ground-truthing and mapping will be considered as part of the planning updates and development approvals process. OCPs, rezonings and other permitting processes, will collect such information wherever possible.

2A-6 Working with private landowners, environmental organizations and upper-level governments, local governments will encourage and assist in the sharing of mapping and ground-truthing.

RGS page 34 – Other Important Ecosystems

Rationale:
Other important ecosystems (OIE) include second growth forests and seasonally flooded agricultural lands. These sensitive ecosystems have suffered the greatest loss, and fragmentation of sensitive ecological areas in the Comox Valley. The RGS policy allows "low to high human activity" in these areas providing very little actual protection. This policy needs to be amended to limit the impact of human activity so that natural systems can be maintained or enhanced.

Proposed RGS Amendment:

Other important ecosystems These areas are identified by the Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory (SEI) and include Second Growth Forests and Seasonally Flooded Agricultural Fields.

They provide opportunities for landscape connectivity, sensitive ecosystem buffers or transition areas, and compatible human use. Human use may include access to resources (e.g. farming, selective harvest of timber or non-timber products) or limited development opportunities in specified locations. In these areas, human activity can be sustainable if it maintains and / or enhances natural systems.

RGS page 37 – Objective 2-B: Frame environmental protection and policies around the principles of precaution, connectivity and restoration- supporting policies

Rationale:
Include incentives as one of the tools that all local governments can use for environmental protection .

Proposed RGS Amendment:

2B-1: Local governments should work together to adopt consistent actions and policies for environmental and natural resource protection, through OCPs, zoning, incentives and other mechanisms, that promote the principles of precaution, connectivity and restoration.

Rationale:
Strengthen implementation of policy 2B-2 by replacing "should explore" with "will adopt."

Proposed RGS Amendment:

2B-2 OCPs will adopt consistent regional definitions and guidelines for conservation areas and work with neighbouring local governments to create region-wide linkages.

Rationale:

Amend RGS to add the following supporting policies to Objective 2-B:

Proposed RGS Amendments:

2B-4 Require new developments to improve or expand conservation areas and provide for linkages between them.

2B-5 All local governments will ensure appropriate buffers and transition zones adjacent to conservation areas to minimize negative impacts from development.

2B-6 Require new developments to apply an approach that considers the location of the development within its formative system in order to protect or enhance natural systems and ecosystem functioning. [For example, development in the upper watershed (water receiving) requires a very different approach than development in the lower watershed (water discharge).]

2B-7 Require new development to consider the features, form and location (physiography) of the proposed site to protect or enhance ecosystem functioning. [For example: development at Point Holmes requires a very different approach than development in Black Creek because the physiography (represented, in this case, by soils) varies remarkably from one site to the other.]

5.0 Inconsistencies within RGS in Part 4: Managing Growth & Part 5: Implementation and Monitoring

The first three parts of the RGS contains valuable information, a clear vision and a set of regional goals and policies that direct the future land use decisions by all local governments. It shows that a great deal of work and consideration of public input went into this part of the RGS.

The last two parts of the RGS document, however, do not reflect the same care and consideration found in the first 3 parts. There are inconsistencies in parts 4 & 5 with the goals, objectives and policies outlined in the first 3 parts. Our submission addresses these inconsistencies and proposes amendments to correct them.

6.0 Managing Growth (RGS Part 4)

6.1 Municipal Expansion Areas

In the RGS part 1 (p. 11) the RGS identifies the impact of recent housing patterns in the Comox Valley :

"While the existing settlement pattern is still relatively compact and the overall housing stock diverse, the more recent trend is towards a more dispersed settlement pattern made up of mostly low-density housing forms. Continuation of this trend would result in significant urban and rural sprawl, creating stress on the valley’s natural areas and ecological functions, increasing reliance on automobile travel and impacting the character and livability of the region’s rural and urban communities. Development must be directed in a manner that creates a sustainable long-term development pattern that uses both land and infrastructure in the most efficient manner."

The RGS addresses this issue in part 2 (p.25) by indicating that the population in the Comox Valley is expected to increase by 25,000 requiring an estimated 10,000 housing units, and that 90% of population growth should be directed to the Core Settlement Areas. Further, "The focus of higher density and intensive developments shall be within the existing Municipal Areas. Within the Municipal Areas densification and intensification of development is required including infill and redevelopment."

It makes no sense to include MEAs since the RGS has identified that capacity exists within core municipalities to absorb 90% of the growth, with Sage Hills, Rural Nodes and available rural properties for the remaining 10%. So why are municipal expansion areas (MEAs) proposed? It states on p. 91 that "they have the long-term potential to accommodate future growth…" Identifying areas for "potential future growth" will promote land speculation, increase pressure for development of existing natural areas and ecosystems (greenfield development) and lead to urban sprawl.

The MEAs should be removed from the RGS based on the information and policies of the RGS in the first 3 parts.

6.2 Proposed Amendments

RGS page 91-93 – Replace Municipal Expansion Areas with Service Extension Areas

Rationale:

We are proposing an amendment to replace Municipal Expansion Areas with policies that provide for Service Extension Areas. This should be done to address the environmental and public health issues from failing septic systems. This amendment is consistent with the original mandate of the RGS which was to "have a strong environmental focus, and deal with critical issues of urban containment boundaries, urban intensification…" (Letter to the Comox Strathcona Regional District, page 2, from Ida Chong, B.C. Minister of Community Services, July 13, 2007)

Proposed RGS Amendments

1. (d) Service Extension Areas (page 91)
Service Extension Areas are located on the fringe of Municipal Areas. They have been identified because they contain existing settlements with private water and/or sewer servicing that will eventually require the extension of publicly operated water and sewer services, in order to address public health and environmental issues before they arise.

There are a number of existing neighbourhoods, such as Marsden/Arden and Royston, located on the fringes of the Municipal Areas. For the most part, these neighbourhoods were built without full municipal infrastructure – in other words, they contain on-site servicing such as septic systems and/or private well or private/public water systems. Many of them are built at densities that today would be considered too high for such private servicing systems because of water quality and public health issues. Experience has shown that private septic and water systems need ongoing maintenance to prevent failure.

While most landowners are responsible and keep their systems maintained, over time such systems have proven to fail and need to be replaced at considerable costs to landowners. More typically, a number of systems will fail at the same time (given that they have similar life cycles); creating pressure to extend publicly operated water and sewer services into the affected area.

Given the number and density of private systems located on the fringe of Municipal Areas, there is a need to develop a long-term strategy to prevent public health concerns before they arise. Private wells, watercourses and the marine foreshore within the Comox Valley could be seriously compromised should a number of septic systems fail in the coming years prior to detection. As a result, it is the long-term intention of the growth management
strategy that existing neighbourhoods within designated Service Extension Areas will eventually be provided with publically owned water and sewer services. Such provision of services will be coincident with a new Local Area Plan being developed.

Proposed RGS Amendments (p 92-93):

MG Policy 1D-3 – Water and Sewer Services within Service Extension Areas Municipal Expansion Areas. (p. 92)

Publically owned water and sewer services will, in the long-term, be provided within Service Extension Areas, coincident with LAP updating and infrastructure capacity in a financially feasible manner.

MG Policy 1D-4 –Public Health and Environmental Issues in Service Extension Areas (P.93)

Where a demonstrated public health or environmental issue has been identified due to failing private water or sewer systems within Service Extension Areas, local governments will work together to expedite the provision of publically owned water and sewer services to such areas in a financially feasible manner.

MG Policy 1D-5 –Development within Service Extension Areas (p.93)

Any development within Service Extension Areas allowed in a revised LAP will be phased in an orderly manner in order to ensure that appropriate infrastructure capacity is available, that this development does not detract from compact growth options within Municipal Areas, and that the financial stability of Municipal Areas is not negatively impacted.

RGS page 81 to 82 – Growth Management Principles

Proposed RGS Amendments:
Managing Growth Principle 9 (page 82)

Identify areas of existing development on the fringes of Municipal Areas that should be provided with publically owned water and sewer services in order to address existing public health and environmental issues.

Managing Growth 10 (page 82)

Areas for new development on the fringes of Municipal Areas should only be identified for incorporation into Municipal Areas through boundary extensions and provided with publically owned water and sewer services when the Core Settlement Areas are at capacity. If and when this occurs it will be to allow for new long-term growth opportunities in a phased and orderly manner.

Managing Growth Principle 1

Rationale:

This principle needs to be consistent with RGS Goal 2: Ecosystems, Natural Areas and Parks by including references to "linkages," "conservation areas" and the goal of forming a "conservation network."

Proposed RGS Amendment:
Protect and link natural and ecological features (conservation areas) throughout the Comox Valley to form a conservation network.

Managing Growth Principles 13 & 14

Rationale:

These two principles are inconsistent with the Comox Valley Sustainability Strategy.

Proposed RGS Amendments:

Managing Growth Principle 13.
Maintain resource areas as primarily working landscapes for sustainable resource extraction.

Managing Growth Principle 14
Promote and support the overall economic viability of the Municipal Areas so that they can continue to provide primary base for sustainable residential, commercial and institutional activities.

7.0 Monitoring and Implementation (RGS Part 5)

This part of the RGS outlines a process for amending the RGS. The proposed process does not promote transparency and public consultation. This could lead to divisive future growth management decisions, community conflict and public cynicism. Specific concerns with the RGS amendment process include:

• Public hearing process is optional rather than mandatory
• Little or no option for public consultation on proposed amendments
• Major revisions such as creating municipal expansion areas not already identified on the RGS maps are allowed to go through as "minor amendments."

To improve the RGS amendment process and address our concerns we propose that this part be amended. The changes we propose would require the RGS amendment process to:

• require all amendments to follow the standard amendment process,
• include a mandatory public hearing, and
• ensure public consultation occur before 1st and 2nd reading.

By including consultation in the development of amendments, local government will be more likely to gain the confidence and support of the public and community stakeholders. Local Governments benefit when consulting with agencies, community organizations and individual citizens who have valuable knowledge and expertise that is not available within local governments.

We are recommending that amendments be made to Part 5: Monitoring and Implementation to incorporate the above improvements. Further, all references to boundary extension and Municipal Expansion Areas should be removed so that Part 5 text is consistent with the amendments we propose in Part 4: Managing Growth.

8.0 Glossary Additions

RGS page 115 to 123 – Additional and Revised Glossary Terms

Rationale:
Natural systems and biodiversity do not adhere to jurisdictional borders and boundaries. In order to effectively manage growth and undertake regional land use planning it is imperative that the Valley’s local governments are able to clearly communicate using a common set of terms. For effective regional conservation planning, terms are needed that define the what, why, and how of conserving, restoring and protecting the Comox Valley’s natural areas.

Land use and development planning terms are human-centric, which focuses our thinking and discussions on how humans use the land. This focus hides the impact on ecosystems and the non-human inhabitants. Human impact is ever increasing and causing an ecological debt to accumulate. In order to achieve conservation objectives in land use planning a set of science based terms must be used.

Currently, there is a lack of commonly defined and used science based land use planning terms. In some cases, terms such as "greenways" are used by local jurisdictions- but they have different meanings. A "greenway" in one jurisdiction can mean a paved walkway, in another an area set aside for habitat protection.

The RGS introduces several conservation terms, but defines only some of them. All these terms should be clearly defined with the appropriate science based definitions. If this is done, the RGS will make an important contribution to providing all Comox Valley governments with a common set of terms that will assist in effective regional conservation planning.

The following list of RGS terms, with definitions, is presented for inclusion in the RGS glossary.

Proposed terms for inclusion:

Biodiversity corridors: (also called wildlife corridors or ecological greenways) areas of suitable habitat that provide functional linkages between protected areas. Their primary function is to conserve habitat for species movement and for the maintenance of viable populations. Streams, watercourses and riparian areas form natural biodiversity corridors; however, biodiversity corridors are also essential for linking upland habitat areas including forests, woodlands and wetlands.

Ecological Greenways: (see biodiversity corridors)

ESAs: if this is to be used in the text of the final RGS it should be defined.

Other Important Ecosystems: two types of ecosystems that have been modified by human use yet have been identified by the Sensitive Ecosystems Inventory (SEI) as having high biodiversity and wildlife habitat values. For the East Vancouver Island SEI these areas are: Seasonally Flooded Agricultural Fields and Older Second Growth Forests.

Recreational Greenways: trails and roadways that functionally link sites for human use and recreation. Key roles of the recreational greenways system are to encourage non-motorized modes of transportation and to increase public access to greenspace. Both greenway trails and roads are envisioned as having special facilities for people to walk and bicycle and to make them accessible for people with mobility challenges.

Riparian area: (also called riparian zone) this term, used in land use management and planning, describes a set width area surrounding streams, lakes and wetlands. The width of a riparian area is measured from the top of bank. A riparian area differs from a riparian
ecosystem, which is a distinct ecological system surrounding streams and wetlands. Riparian ecosystems are delineated by site-specific vegetation, soil and elevation features. They support high levels of biodiversity, protect adjacent aquatic areas and stabilize stream banks. They are critical refuges and natural linkages/corridors for wildlife.

Sensitive ecosystems: ecosystems that are remnants of larger intact ecosystems that once existed and are now considered to be rare and/or fragile. These ecosystem types have been identified and described by the Sensitive Ecosystems Inventory (SEI) for East Vancouver Island: Coastal Bluff, Sparsely Vegetated, Terrestrial Herbaceous, Wetland, Riparian, Woodland and Older Forest.

Sensitive Ecosystems Inventory (SEI): an inventory that systematically identifies and maps terrestrial ecosystems and other habitats of high biodiversity, that remain relatively unmodified. The purpose of the Sensitive Ecosystems Inventory (SEI) is to encourage land-use decisions that will ensure the continued integrity of these ecosystems.

Download this page as a PDF document here (pdf 172kb)