After a lengthy and at times emotional discussion, Castlegar city council has sent the proposed Castlegar Waterfront Master Plan back to the planning and development committee for some alterations.
The 100 page document is meant to be a guide for the next 25 years. It focuses primarily on the 12 kilometres of waterfront from Castlegar’s downtown and north-end residential neighbourhood to Blueberry at the city’s southern end.
The plan has been in development since the 2011 public consultation phase of the city’s official community plan update identified a strong desire to improve public access to the Columbia River waterfront.
Early in 2017 a consultant was hired to help develop the plan and organize the public engagement process. About 120 people attended a 2017 public workshop which was followed by about 100 people attending a public open house in November 2017. Feedback forms were gathered and the concept ideas were then refined.
The complete plan can be found in the May 22 city council package on the city’s web site.
A large number of waterfront property owners are not in favour of the plan and some of them attended Tuesday’s council meeting. The tension in the room was noticeable.
Coun. Deb McIntosh was the strongest proponent for the plan and tried to quell some misconceptions out in the community.
“It opens up opportunities … to make it more accessible, more adaptable and more open to other people.”
She also acknowledged that the city set off on the wrong foot with this project.
She said failing to pass the plan may keep even the projects on public land from happening.
“It doesn’t allow us to look at doing a pier down at Millennium, it doesn’t allow us to make view points — it holds up everything else.”
She encouraged the other councillors to vote in favour of moving forward.
“I know having an angry crowd is an uncomfortable feeling — it makes you worry about what is going to happen, but we have to think about the bigger picture … There is a ton of low-hanging fruit that we can do for the betterment of everyone without infringing on your guys’ private property … that was never the intention.”
Coun. Arry Dhillon said he would not be voting in favour of the plan.
“I’m not a fan of this 25 year plan. I’m more in favour of a natural pathway that builds over time by people using it in areas where there is not a conflict — not dividing the community,” he said.
Coun. Bruno Tassone said, “I think we need to put this aside for a while — bring it back 25 years from now.” The statement brought applause from the gallery.
Coun. Dan Rye said he is not against the entire plan, but would like to see some changes before he would feel comfortable voting for it.
McIntosh also expressed disappointment in the lack of feedback from her fellow councillors about the plan in the weeks leading up to it coming before council for a vote.
“If we have identified supporting part of it and easing the minds of our constituents that live on the riverfront that their properties are not going to be bulldozed … if we can agree to adopt a portion of it and have it go back to committee, I’m fine with that.”
McIntosh added, “Nobody at this table … has any ill intent to disrupt, take away, harm anybody’s property at all — we are better than that, we know better than that. We are your neighbours, your friends and your citizens as well.”
One of the items of contention in the plan is what is being referred to as the “yellow line.” It is a line that was highlighted in drawings from one end of town to the other as a potential pathway for trails. That line makes property owners very nervous.
Coun. Tassone stated that the yellow line is one of the biggest reasons he is against the current plan. He would be in favour of the projects on public land however.
Council was encouraged by CAO Chris Barlow to make clear what portions they would vote in favour of, before staff takes the time to rewrite the plan.
“Staff worked very hard on this, because we have obviously heard for a very long time not just the concerns, but the wishes and desires of the community,” he said.
Barlow also noted that in the plan any projects on private property are low on the priority list and that if the city decided to move ahead on a project it would first have to come before council, come before the steering committee and receive permission from the property owner.
A revised version of the plan is not expected for at least a month.
See full story at castlegarnews.com.
