Introduction ...... 3 Location ...... 3 Planning Area Boundary ...... 5 Developed Portions of Planning Area ...... 6 Photos of the Planning Area ...... 7 1.0 Part One: Community Profile ...... 14 1.1 Natural Environment ...... 14 Land Forms ...... 14 Geology ...... 14 Hydrology ...... 14 Soils ...... 15 Climate ...... 15 Vegetation and Forests ...... 15 Sensitive Ecosystems and Endangered Species ...... 15 Wildlife ...... 16 Freshwater Fisheries ...... 16 Marine Environment ...... 16 1.2 First Nations History ...... 16 Tla’amin Nation ...... 16 Klahoose Nation ...... 18 Homalco Nation ...... 18 1.3 Settlement History ...... 18 Settlements and Land Use ...... 19 Community Infrastructure ...... 20 Transportation ...... 21 1.4 Economy ...... 21 1.5 Demographic Analysis ...... 22 Population ...... 22

1 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Projections ...... 24 2.0 Review of Background Documents ...... 25 2.1 Environment ...... 25 Malaspina Master Plan (1979) ...... 25 Powell River Regional District Tsunami Report (2007) ...... 28 Powell River Regional District RAR Implementation Report (2008) ...... 28 Theodosia Watershed Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations Plan (2012) ...... 29 Identification of Natural Hazard Areas Malaspina Peninsula / Okeover Inlet (2013)...... 30 2.2 First Nations ...... 32 Protocol Agreement for Communication and Cooperation (2004) ...... 32 Sliammon/Powell River Regional District Harmonization Project Final Report (2008) ...... 33 Tla’amin Land Use Plan (2010) ...... 35 Tla’amin Final Agreement (2011) ...... 36 2.3 Sustainability ...... 37 A Sustainability Charter for the Powell River Region (2010) ...... 37 2.4 Economic Development ...... 39 The Malaspina Okeover Coastal Plan (2004) ...... 39 Powell River Regional District Growth and Development Analysis (2008) ...... 41 Economic Development Plan for Agriculture (2009) ...... 42 Powell River Regional Business Inventory (2013) ...... 42 2.5 Parks and Recreation ...... 44 Regional District Parks and Greenspace Plan (2010) ...... 44 2.6 Community ...... 44 Lund Official Community Plan (1998) ...... 44 Powell River’s Vital Signs (2012) ...... 47 References ...... 50 Map Appendices ...... 52

2 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Introduction This technical background report is a foundational document for the new Electoral Area A Official Community Plan. The report has been prepared in two parts for ease of reference. Part one provides a community profile for the planning area with discussion of the natural environment, first nation history, settlement history, economy and demography. Part two provides a summary of background documents that include critical information for understanding the environmental, social and economic context of the community and the wider Powell River region. Understanding the issues and recommendations outlined in these background documents will help inform the identification of planning issues and policy considerations options for the new official community plan.

Location Powell River Regional District ‐ Electoral Area A is located on the beautiful upper Sunshine Coast mainland and encompasses Malaspina Peninsula, Powell Lake Watershed, Theodosia Watershed and Toba Inlet. Electoral Area A also contains Savary, Hernando, Copeland and Mink Islands and many other smaller islands located in Desolation Sound and Malaspina Inlet. Area A is the largest and northern‐ most electoral area within the Powell River Regional District. To the north of Electoral Area A lies Bute Inlet and Strathcona Regional District; to the west is the Salish Sea and Vancouver Island; to the south is the Village of Teeshohsum (Sliammon IR #1) and the City of Powell River; to the south east is Electoral Area B and C of the Powell River Regional District; and to the north east is the Squamish Lillooet Sunshine Coast Regional District.

Although located on the mainland, the area can be reached by air or water only. The area is linked with the rest of the mainland and Vancouver Island via the airport in the City of Powell River and BC Ferry Corporation ferry terminals in Westview (City of Powell River) and Saltery Bay.

Area A is typical of the south coast region of British Columbia with vast forests of Coastal Douglas Fir and Coastal Western Hemlock, alpine, lake and river systems, valley bottoms and sheltered and exposed waterfront. Residential and commercial development within the planning area is clustered around the Village of Lund and southern Malaspina Peninsula. Recreational homes and cottages are primarily focussed on Savary Island, Hernando Island and Galley Bay.

A wide range of outdoor recreational opportunity exists in Area A. Provincial and regional parks in the area include: Copeland Islands Marine Park; Desolation Sound Marine Park; Malaspina Provincial Park; Tux’wnech Okeover Arm Provincial Park; Dinner Rock Recreation Site; and and Craig Road Regional Park. In addition, provincial crown lands in the area contain a well‐developed network of recreational trails in the front and backcountry for hiking, mountain biking and ATV use. Hiking trails in the area include the popular Sunshine Coast Trail that runs from Sarah Point to Saltery Bay. Marine waters, bays and inlets provide protected moorage and gorgeous vistas for sailing, cruising, kayaking and diving.

3 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Figure 1: Electoral Area A

4 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Planning Area Boundary For the purposes of the Area A Official Community Plan (OCP), the planning area boundary will include all of Electoral Area A except for:  Savary Island, which has its own relatively recent official community plan to guide land use and development on the island; and  Tla’amin Lands, which will be outside the jurisdiction of the Regional District after effective date of the Treaty. The Tla’amin Nation is currently developing their own land use plan to guide land use and development on Tla’amin lands.

Figure 2: Area A OCP Planning Area Boundary

5 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Developed Portions of Planning Area While Area A is vast, approximately 95% of the area is composed of provincial Crown lands. The official community plan can include these lands within the planning area boundary and can include a policy framework for activities on Crown lands. However, these will be advocacy policies only. The province has ultimate decision making authority on Crown lands. Accordingly, the heart of the official community plan will be the developed portions of the planning area on the southern Malaspina Peninsula. Within the developed portions of the planning area are the Village of Lund and a collection of neighbourhoods that together make up the larger “community” of Area A.

Figure 3: Developed Portions of Planning Area

6 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Photos of the Planning Area These aerial photos capture the stunning coastal landscapes of the planning area and illustrate the very rural nature of this community. All aerial photos were taken by Georgia Combes, resident of Lund.

Photo 1: Atrevida Reef, looking south to Teeshohsum and City of Powell River

Photo 2: Lund Harbour

7 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Photo 3: Malaspina Peninsula, north of Lund

Photo 4: Copeland Islands, Lund in the background

8 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Photo 5: Bliss Landing

Photo 6: Malaspina Peninsula, north of Bliss Landing

9 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Photo 7: Sarah Point

Photo 8: Parker Harbour, Malaspina Inlet in the background

10 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Photo 9: Bunster Hills, looking across Okeover Inlet, Malaspina Peninsula with Savary and Hernando Islands in background

Photo 10: Bunster Hills, looking across Okeover Inlet to west side of Malaspina Peninsula with the Okeover Wharf and Tux’wnech Okeover Arm Provinicial Park on waterfront

11 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Photo 11: Aquaculture farms in Thor Cove, Lancelot Inlet, Theodosia Inlet in background

Photo 12: Log storage and handling in Theodosia Inlet

12 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

The planning area is also home to a diverse array of small to medium size businesses and home‐based businesses. The following photos are courtesy of Jason Rekve, resident of Area A.

Photo 13: Signs for Local Businesses, Highway 101 and Malaspina Road

Photo 14: Home‐Based Business, Malaspina Road

13 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

1.0 Part One: Community Profile The community profile is a starting point for exploring the natural environment, first nation history, settlement history and economy that have played a role in shaping how the area has developed over time. The community profile finishes with a demographic analysis to inform our understanding of population trends over time and what they could mean for the future.

1.1 Natural Environment The natural environment is typical of the south coast region of British Columbia with vast forests of Coastal Douglas Fir and Coastal Western Hemlock, alpine, lake and river systems, valley bottoms and sheltered and exposed waterfront. Technical information in this section draws almost entirely from the Malaspina Master Plan (1979).

Land Forms Topographic features of the area are common to the west coast of British Columbia. The land is for the most part steeply sloped with frequent bedrock outcroppings. In spite of the uneven and often thin soil mantel, vegetation is generally heavy. The shoreline usually slopes steeply to the upland leaving infrequent lowland pockets along the coast. The upland is characteristically rugged with hummocky rock. Knolls and ridges sometimes reach an elevation of 300 metres. Areas of good bench land often occur between the shoreline escarpment and the rough upland. Pebble beaches between bedrock outcrops make up the shore and sandy beaches are rare.

The southern portion of Malaspina Peninsula contains the highest proportion of gentle slopes and deep soils. North of Lund, steeper slopes, areas of solid bedrock and thin soil over broken rock are more common.

Geology The peninsula is composed of Mesozoic granitic, volcanic and/or sedimentary bedrock covered in thin drifts of glacial till and/or marine deposits. In the southern portion of the peninsula, immediately east of Savary Island is an area of significant proven limestone deposits which have all been claimed but not developed.

Hydrology Investigations of peninsular ground and surface water have been cursory. Low lying areas of drift between the peninsula’s bedrock high spots offer the most promise of potable water. Wells completed into the drift or bedrock should be capable of meeting individual domestic requirements based on lot sizes of 2 to 4 hectares. Water quality is not expected to present any major problems.

On the peninsula, surface water run‐off results in erosion in areas of steep terrain, loose soil and sparse vegetation. Winter rains leach out soils and valuable nutrients not absorbed by plants are lost. On flat lands (less than 3% slope) internal drainage is often slow and localized marshes or wetlands develop. These wetlands serve as stream flow regulators and reduce flood danger in creeks and streams during heavy winter rains.

14 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Lakes within the study area are of glacial origin having been gorged in the bedrock of valley floors. Most of the lakes are shallow with gently sloping shorelines containing areas of alluvial silt. The lakes regulate stream flow and act to reduce flooding as do the wetlands. Lund and Thulin Lakes play an important role in the Lund watershed reserve.

Provincial data on community watersheds, freshwater named watersheds and freshwater unnamed watersheds within developed portions of the planning area are illustrated on the map in Appendix 1 to this report.

Soils The Malaspina Peninsula does not have significant areas of soil depth and nature suitable for cash crop agriculture. Much of the peninsula is too steeply sloped, rocky and rugged to retain a good mantle mantel of soil. Deeper mineral soils occupy the lower slopes and flat lowlands.

There are pockets of good soils that support agriculture and farming. Areas such as Craig Road have been extensively farmed for approximately one hundred years. Market gardens and home gardens continue to be important for local food production and quality of life.

Climate The Malaspina Peninsula experiences a mild maritime climate with a mean annual temperature of 9C and monthly temperatures ranging from 2C in January to 16C in July. Annual precipitation averages about 109 centimetres with most of this as rain.

During summer there is usually a light cooling sea breeze blowing from the west. Seasonal temperatures are such that the region has recorded an average of 330 frost free days annually. The months of May through September are totally frost free.

Vegetation and Forests The forest cover of the peninsula consists predominantly of Douglas Fir, Red Cedar and Western Hemlock with Salal covering the under‐story. Areas of deep mineral soils are densely covered by coniferous forest and shrubs. Low‐lying bottom land sustains Red Alder and Broad Leaf Maple forming a closed canopy. Areas of clay soils often include Willow and Cottonwood with a dense cover of shrubs where light permits their survival. There are a few isolated wetland areas where the vegetation is composed of sedges, grasses and bulrushes. In these areas, trees are rare. Individual stands of Arbutus trees are found along the coast, usually at the top of escarpments with westerly exposures.

Sensitive Ecosystems and Endangered Species Sensitive ecosystems inventory (SEI) data was generated by the provincial Conservation Data Centre in 2006 and is illustrated on the map in Appendix 2 to this report. SEI data includes herbaceous, mature and old forest, woodland, riparian and wetland areas. While SEI data is useful for general information purposes, the data does not define the accurate location or occurrence of sensitive ecosystems on the ground. Accuracy of the SEI data is limited by the scale and quality of air photos used and the minimal field checking that was done at the time the inventory was completed.

15 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

The Coastal Douglas Fir ecosystem is an endangered ecosystem within the planning area. The Coastal Douglas Fir ecosystem occurs east from the village of Lund and along the entire coastline from just south of Lund through Teeshohsum (Sliammon). Coastal Douglas Fir ecosystem also occurs on Hernando Island. Endangered species within the planning area include: Dull Oregon Grape, Labrador Tea, Western Bog Laurel, Peat Mosses, Marbled Murrelet, Painted Turtle‐Pacific Coast and the Slim Leaf Onion.

Wildlife Wildlife on the peninsula consists of animals native to the BC coast. Common wildlife include deer, racoon, rodents, beaver, otter, mink, several species of eagle and hawk, osprey, peregrine falcon, ducks, geese and swan. Cougar, bear and wolves are less common. Mt. Goat are common in alpine areas of Toba Inlet and Powell Daniels Watershed. Elk have been reintroduced to the Theodosia Watershed.

Freshwater Fisheries Two species of freshwater sports fish, other than salmon, are found on the Malaspina Peninsula. These include the coastal cutthroat trout and steelhead trout. Both non‐anadromous and anadromous (sea‐ going) forms of cutthroat trout inhabit the peninsula. Non‐anadromous coastal cutthroat is a permanent resident of creeks including those that flow out of Orpana Lake, Thulin Lake, unnamed lakes that drain into Trevenen Bay, Okeover Creek, Sliammon Lake, Sliammon Creek and Appleton Creek. Anadromous coastal cutthroat trout congregate at or near the mouth of streams in areas such as Grace Harbour, Theodosia River estuary, Okeover Creek and Emmonds Beach. The Theodosia River is the only river on the peninsula that is inhabited by steelhead trout.

Marine Environment Marine waters, bays and inlets are an important recreational resource. Several bays on the west coast of the peninsula north of Lund and in the inland waters of Okeover Inlet and Desolation Sound offer good to excellent moorages for boats.

The marine life of the coast is varied and abundant. Marine fisheries include chinook and coho salmon in waters surrounding Malaspina Peninsula, especially in the vicinity of Sarah Point, the Copeland Islands and Lund. Ling cod and rock fish area also common in the Lund to Bliss Landing area and central Malaspina Inlet. Shellfish native to the marine environment include oysters, clams and sea urchin.

1.2 First Nations History Tla’amin, Klahoose and Homalco First Nation traditional territories encompass the lands and waters now known as Electoral Area A of the Powell River Regional District. These First Nations have a common history in the area that dates back over 8,500 years and there are countless archaeological sites that document First Nations history, culture and presence on the land.

Tla’amin Nation Tla’amin creation stories speak of how She the gos (the Creator) put Tla’amin people on the earth since time immemorial. This connection has been nourished by Tla’amin teachings, which show how Tla’amin people are bound to the forests and waters of the territory. Tla’amin connection to the land is reflected in the words jeh jeh which mean both relative and tree in Tla’amin language.

16 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

The territory of the Tla’amin Nation was rich in natural resources. Almost everything around them was utilized for tools, clothing, food, shelter, medicine, transportation and ahjusehm (trade) with other Nations. Like other Northern Coast Salish people, the Tla’amin followed an endless cycle of activities focussed on harvesting, processing, sharing and trading foods and materials. People came together at winter village sites during the cold months but travelled scattered to separate sites throughout the territory when the weather warmed.

A family’s ability to harvest available resources throughout the territory demanded considerable knowledge of the natural landscape, weather patterns, tides and seasonal changes. The availability of plant resources, game and fish varied considerably throughout the territory. Many resources could be harvested only at specific times of the year and only in specific locations. People had to be in certain places at the time berries ripened or fish swam upstream or they would go hungry (Washington, 2004).

Tla’amin people lived by the 13 moons, this was their traditional way of life. The endless seasonal cycle of harvesting, processing, sharing and trading resources is represented by the circular 13 moon calendar shared by the Tla’amin, Klahoose and Homalco people. The circle represents the 13 moons of the ancestors, who had their own way of differentiating the cycle of life. It represents the different seasons and the times of the year to harvest. In traditional times, Tla’amin harvested hundreds of species of fish, beach foods, land mammals, sea mammals, birds and plants (Tla’amin Land and Water Use Plan, 2005).

Tla’amin place names and legends tell a rich story of Tla’amin occupation and use of a territory that extends from the vicinity of Stillwater and part of Texada Island, northward along Malaspina and Gifford Peninsulas to the southern area of Homfray Channel and part of Cortes Island, including the smaller offshore islands of Hernando, Savary and Harwood Islands as well as Powell, Goat and Haslam Lakes. Within Electoral Area A of the Powell River Regional District, there were several important Tla’amin winter villages including: Teeshohsum (Sliammon); Klehkwahnohm (Scuttle Bay); Klaahmen (Lund); Kahkeeky (Grace Harbour); Tuxwnech (head of Okeover Inlet); and Tohkwonon (Theodosia Inlet).

Since the late 1800’s, many forces have served to undermine Tla’amin traditional governance systems and laws and displaced Tla’amin people from their traditional territories and villages that sustained their ancestors for thousands of years. Many places that were once important for resource harvesting and spiritual sustenance are now the sites of residential, commercial and industrial developments. For example, the village of Klaahmen, originally settled and occupied by the Tla’amin was a place of abundant resources from the sea and forests and the site of winter feasting and dancing. However, by the late 1800’s, there were very few Tla’amin people still living there. Through the federal Indian Act and Indian Reserve system, Tla’amin people were relocated from many of their winter and seasonal villages to live permanently in Teeshohsum (Sliammon) on Sliammon Indian Reserve #1.

Through the BC Treaty Process and the First Nations Land Management Act, the Tla’amin Nation has been working to restore their traditional governance role, re‐establish their ownership of lands and re‐ establish their resource stewardship role. The Tla’amin Nation is developing has developed their own land use plans and land use laws to guide future use of Tla’amin lands and resources. They are also

17 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan successfully meeting provincial standards in managing their own Community Forest Tenure and Woodlot License and exploring collaborative planning processes with provincial and local agencies such as: the Theodosia Stewardship Roundtable; and Collaborative for the Protection of Archaeological Sites.

Working together to explore policy options that harmonize land use planning in interface areas between Tla’amin lands and Electoral Area A will be an important as we move forward in the official community planning process.

Appendix 3 and 4 to this report contain maps that illustrate land status and clearly identify Tla’amin Lands in relation to Electoral Area A. There are also potential future acquisition parcels in Thulin Passage north of Lund and south from Sharpes Bay.

Klahoose Nation Klahoose Nation traditional territory encompasses the Toba River Watershed and the north western portion of Area A and overlaps with the Tla’amin traditional territory in the Desolation Sound and Okeover Inlet areas.

The Klahoose hold two Indian Reserves within Area A, one is located at the mouth of Toba River and the other is located at Forbes Bay. These reserve lands are identified on the land status map in Appendix 4 to this report. The Klahoose Nation also holds a Community Forest Tenure in the Toba Watershed.

As the Area A official community planning process progresses it will be important to identify Klahoose Nation interests in Area A and work together to harmonize land use planning in interface areas between Klahoose lands and Electoral Area A.

Homalco Nation Homalco Nation traditional territory encompasses the Bute River Watershed and lands to the northwest of Area A in Strathcona Regional District. The Homalco territory overlaps with the Klahoose and Tla’amin traditional territories in the Desolation Sound and Okeover Inlet areas.

As the Area A official community planning process progresses it will be important to identify Homalco Nation interests in Area A.

1.3 Settlement History The City of Powell River and surrounding region was settled in the early 1900’s and started its history as a lumber and pulp and paper town. Provincial crown lands surrounding the city, settlement allotments and homesteads in the rural areas supplied the timber to feed the mill. As a consequence of this logging history and the region’s dependence on timber harvesting for economic development, most provincial lands surrounding developed portions of the planning area are composed of second growth forests. Many places still have visible railroad beds, old logging equipment, homesteads and orchards.

18 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Settlements and Land Use The settlement pattern of Area A is reflective of its history with development concentrated in the village of Lund and in pockets along the coastline and Highway 101. Historically, logging and fishing were the primary industries attracting and employing settlers to this region. Since 1891, Lund and the surrounding area of southern Malaspina Peninsula have been settled, surveyed, subdivided and developed into a collection of rural neighbourhoods that together make up the larger “community” of Area A.

The Lund area was first surveyed in 1891. The first subdivisions were the Finn Bay Area in 1913 and Lund in 1959. The village of Lund developed as the commercial heart of the planning area with a thriving harbour, village centre and arts community. Residential settlement in Lund is composed of mixed lot sizes with smaller lots closer to the village centre and along the waterfront and larger rural lots as you move out from the village centre.

Outside of Lund, settlement is generally sparse, with large rural lots where individuals can live their lives little interference from their neighbours, where clearings for house sites and associated development require only a portion of property, leaving much of the natural area intact. The map on page 6 of this report 3 provides a visual of settlement patterns in the planning area and identifies the neighbourhoods that make up the wider community. within the planning area. These include:

 Pryor Road area – surveyed in 1894 and subdivided in 1976.  Malaspina Road area – surveyed in 1913 and subdivided in 1958.  Okeover Inlet / Crowther Road area – surveyed in 1952 and subdivided in 1958.  Craig Road Area – surveyed in 1971 and subdivided in 1982.  Sturt Road area – surveyed in 1912 and subdivided in 1925.  Emmonds Beach / Atrevida Road area – surveyed in 1923 and subdivided in 1960.  Southview / Wilde Road area – surveyed in 1914 and subdivided in 1961.

In addition to residential settlement, the planning area is home to a diverse array of small to medium size businesses and home‐based businesses. Aquaculture, tourism, forestry, fishing, manufacturing, light industry, the service sector and market gardening all play an important role in the local economy.

Historically, residents of the planning area have enjoyed a high degree of independence and freedom, preferring simple rural living to the often more convenient but costly serviced existence prevalent in the City of Powell River and other urban areas. The valued qualities of affordability and lifestyle, simplicity and freedom, private and peaceful surroundings, local food production and extraordinary natural beauty have been compatible with the predominant lifestyle in the area.

Appendix 5 to this report contains a preliminary land use map generated using 2013 BC Assessment Land Use data. The mapped data identifies residential, agricultural, commercial, industrial and institutional land uses within the developed portions of the planning area. Over the course of the

19 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan official community planning process this map will be reviewed for accuracy and refined to reflect the community vision for future land use.

There is a mix of commercial and light industrial businesses in Lund and small to mid‐sized home based businesses dispersed throughout the settled portions of the planning area. Residents of Area A get most of their goods and services and much of their employment from within the City of Powell River.

Community Infrastructure Residents and businesses in Lund receive water servicing through the Lund Water Improvement District which draws water from the Lund Watershed. Residents and businesses outside of Lund obtain their water from private on‐site wells or small water supply systems. There is no Regional District Water Supply System within Area A.

Groundwater aquifers are the primary source of water in the area and water quantity and quality have generally not been a problem up to this point in time. However, there is a limited amount of information on the aquifers that supply water to residents and businesses within the planning area. Without knowing the quantity of groundwater it is difficult to predict how much future development can be accommodated while ensuring a sustainable supply of good quality surface water and groundwater. Further study into groundwater sources and policy considerations to guide minimum parcel sizes and density will be an important part of the planning process moving forward to protect the fragility of wells. The 1979 Malaspina Master Plan recommended lot sizes of 2 to 4 hectares on the peninsula to ensure adequate water for domestic developments.

There is a Regional District Sewer System that services residents and businesses in Lund. Outside of Lund, all sewage waste is disposed of by private sewage disposal systems – primarily septic tanks and fields but also some pump and haul systems. There are several small package sewage treatment plants servicing strata developments.

The Regional District waste transfer station and recycling station are located south from the City of Powell River in Electoral Area B. There is no Regional District service for road‐side curb‐side pick‐up of solid waste or recycling in any of the electoral areas. The Regional District has been actively promoting a reduction in solid waste through the Regional Solid Waste and Recycling Program called “Let’s Talk Trash”.

Regional District community services within the planning area include: fire protection; emergency services; rural para‐transit and recreation. Fire protection is provided by Northside Volunteer Fire Department located at Craig Road. The fire protection service area includes properties from just north of Lund (north boundary of DLs 4194, 1615, 4204) south to the Sliammon Reserve boundary and includes properties on the Malaspina Peninsula side of Okeover Inlet from Penrose Bay south. It does not include Sharpe’s Bay, Bliss Landing or Savary or Hernando Islands. Parks and recreation services include Craig Road Regional Park and several new waterfront access sites located at Southview, Emmonds Beach, Lund Harbour and Steamboat Bay.

20 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Transportation Highway 101 is the main road serving the mainland of the Powell River region and it runs roughly parallel to the coastline from Saltery Bay to Lund. A network of smaller roads provides access to various subdivisions and neighbourhoods along the southern Malaspina Peninsula and Okeover Inlet. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure has jurisdiction for roads outside the City of Powell River. Further inland and on northern Malaspina Peninsula there is a network of unpaved Forest Service roads and logging roads which are for the most part under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations.

Findings from the 2014 Powell River Regional District Regional Transportation Plan indicate that the main mode of transportation in the region is by vehicle, car or truck. Public transit and active modes such as walking and cycling make up a very small proportion of transportation in the region. Minimal transit service in the rural areas and relatively long travel distances in the rural areas affect the practicality of alternative modes of transportation.

Rural para‐transit service north of the City to Lund is limited to two days a week, Tuesdays and Fridays only. This does not provide a viable alternative for commuting. BC Transit is currently undertaking a service review in the Powell River region which is unlikely to lead to increased para‐transit service but may lead to improved transit schedules.

The road network throughout the region and on Malaspina Peninsula is suitable and appropriate for the current and projected volume of vehicle traffic. However, Highway 101 can be an intimidating place for pedestrians, cyclists and mobility scooters. As such, the Regional Transportation Plan sets out an implementation plan focussed on providing a complete network of shoulders for walking and cycling and bus stop infrastructure in order that residents of the region have a consistent and safe network that facilitates travel by sustainable modes of transportation. Recommended improvements in Area A include working with Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure to complete Highway 101 shoulder upgrades from Teeshohsum (Sliammon) to Lund and to create a parking lane adjacent to the shoulder in Lund. Exploring alternative land use solutions to alleviate the parking issues in Lund could be addressed through the official community planning process.

1.4 Economy Provincial crown lands in Area A are rich in natural resources that have fueled the provincial and regional economy and provided local employment and contracting opportunities for decades. Industrial forestry, hydro power (run of river) independent power projects, aquaculture, marinas and wharves and commercial recreation are key land uses drivers on provincial crown land in Electoral Area A. in our regional, economy. Appendices 6 and 7 to this report contain provincial crown tenure maps that illustrate land and resource uses on provincial crown lands in Electoral Area A.

As mentioned in the previous section to this report, the planning area is also home to a diverse array of small to medium size businesses and home‐based businesses operating on both private and provincial

21 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan crown lands. Aquaculture, tourism, fishing, manufacturing, light industry, the service sector and market gardening all play an important role in the local economy.

Findings from the 2013 Powell River Regional Business Inventory indicate there are well over 90 businesses operating in Electoral Area A. Taking a snapshot of the largest business sectors suggests the primary contributors to the local economy are: accommodation and food; agriculture, forestry and fishing (this includes aquaculture); transport and warehousing; arts, entertainment and recreation; construction and real estate. Exploring policy options for supporting local businesses and growing a sustainable local economy will be an important part of the official community planning process.

1.5 Demographic Analysis

Population Population data from Statistics Canada 2011 Census indicated Electoral Area A had a population of approximately 1008. The population of Electoral Area A constitutes 5.1% of the overall Regional District population of approximately 19,906.

Population 2011 Area of Regional District Population Percentage of RD City of Powell River 13,165 66.1% Tla’amin 752 3.8% Electoral Area A 1,008 5.1% Electoral Area B 1,488 7.5% Electoral Area C 2,014 10.1% Electoral Area D 1,053 5.3% Electoral Area E 426 2.1% Total 19,906 100% Source: 2011 Canada Census

Between 1996 and 2011 the total populations in Electoral Area A and the Powell River Regional District (PRRD) as a whole have remained fairly constant with a percentage change in population well below that experienced for the province of British Columbia. Electoral Area A experienced a steady decrease in population over the 10 years between 1996 and 2006 and then an increase between 2006 and 2011 which returned the population to roughly the same as 1996.

Population Change 1996 ‐ 2011 1996 2001 2006 2011 Total % % % Population Change Change Change Change 1996‐ 2001‐ 2006‐ 2006‐2011 2011 2011 2011 Electoral Area A 1,005 990 914 1,008 94 0.3 1.8 10.3 PRRD 19,935 19,765 19,599 19,906 307 ‐0.1 0.7 1.6 British Columbia 3,724,500 3,907,735 4,113,487 4,400,057 266,570 18.1 12.6 7.0 Source: 1996, 2001, 2006, 2011 Canada Census, 2012 WM Population Analysis

22 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Similar to the populations of Canada and BC, the populations of the Powell River Regional District and Electoral Area A are aging. The Powell River region is similar to other west coast regions, with low fertility rates and “baby boomers” aging into retirement. Other factors contributing to the region’s aging population include the continued out‐migration of young people to pursue post‐secondary education and employment opportunities and the in‐migration of retirees (WM Population Analysis, 2012).

Electoral Area A Population by Age Group 2011 Age Group Population % of Population BC % Canada % Under 20 145 14.4 21.6 23.3 20 ‐ 39 140 13.9 25.6 26.0 40 ‐ 59 380 37.8 30.5 29.9 60 ‐ 74 295 29.4 15.1 14.1 Over 75 45 4.5 7.2 6.8 Source: 2011 Canada Census, 2012 WM Population Analysis

Since 2011, anecdotal data indicates a potential shifting demographic and increase in young adults and families in Lund and the surrounding area. The Lund Pre‐School Program (Puddle Jumpers) which started in 2012 has received increasing numbers of applications for registration over the past three years (conversation with Lund pre‐school teacher Sheila Butts, 2014). As the official community

23 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan planning process moves forward, accessing local population data through local sources such as the Lund Pre‐School, School District 47, Powell River General Hospital could provide a clearer picture of this changing demographic and inform official community plan policy options to support young families and children.

Projections The Powell River Regional District Growth and Development Analysis completed by Vann Struth Consulting Group for the Powell River Regional District in October 2008 looked at the region as a whole. Using two different scenarios – a conservative “Baseline Scenario” and a more optimistic “Worker Migration Scenario” – this analysis offered two views of possible population growth over the same time period. In the conservative scenario, the population of the Regional District is expected to decline by about 600 people by the year 2028. In the more optimistic scenario, the population would increase by nearly 2,100 people.

If Area A continues to retain the same proportion of the region’s population as it has over the last three Census periods, roughly 5%, then the planning area will lose approximately 30 people in the “Baseline Scenario” and gain 105 people in the “Worker Migration Scenario”.

The Powell River Regional District and Unincorporated Areas Aggregated Population Projections completed by WM Population Analysis for the Powell River Regional District in June 2012 predicted a steady decline in the region’s population over the coming decades to 2051.

Findings in both the Vanstruth and the WM Population Analysis reports highlight the importance of in‐ migration key driver of in stimulating future population growth and stabilizing the region’s population. and sustainability in this region will be net migration. Attracting and retaining young adults and families will be critical to the key to this area. regional sustainability.

As the official community planning process moves forward it will be important to consider policy options to encourages economic development, supports and creates new businesses and employment opportunities, protect natural and cultural amenities and enhance quality of life. Also critical will be planning for the needs of an aging population and provision of services such as public transit, health and wellness, care facilities and changing recreational needs.

24 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

2.0 Review of Background Documents There are a number of documents, reports and plans that provide critical background information for understanding the environmental, social and economic context of Electoral Area A and the wider Powell River Region. Understanding the issues and recommendations outlined in these reports and plans will help inform the identification of planning issues and policy considerations options for the Area A Official Community Plan.

A summary of key issues, conclusions and recommendations together with a preliminary analysis of how the Area A OCP might consider could potentially supporting recommendations from these reports and plans follows. Background documents are discussed on the following pages in chronological order from oldest to newest and are organized into six seven categories:

1) Environment; 2) First Nations; 3) Sustainability; 4) Economy; 5) Parks and Recreation; and 6) Community.

2.1 Environment

Malaspina Master Plan (1979) This plan was prepared by the Land Management Branch of the BC Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing. The plan provides a comprehensive overview of the physical and natural environment of the Malaspina Peninsula area and discusses development constraints associated with different environmental factors. The following table summarizes information that is relevant background for the Area A OCP.

Environmental Features Master Plan Conclusions Area A OCP Considerations Options Land Forms Steep slopes with frequent Sites suitable for residential Policies to discourage future bedrock outcroppings development are the exception development in areas with rather than the norm steep slopes Pebble beaches between bedrock outcrops Beaches are not common

Highest proportion of gentle Vehicle access to beach areas and Policies to encourage future slopes and deep soils occur pockets of land suited for residential residential development south south of Lund development is challenged by of Lund difficult road building conditions Geology Mesozoic granitic, volcanic Ground water supplies Policies to protect groundwater and/or sedimentary bedrock sources covered in thin drifts of glacial till and/or marine deposits

25 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Limestone deposits on mainland, directly east of Mineral claims on known limestone Savary Island deposits, uncertainty of land use in vicinity of mineral claims Hydrology Low lying areas of drift Residential density should be Policies to support proof of between the peninsula’s restricted to one unit per 2 to 4 adequate water prior to bedrock high spots offer the hectares if ground water is to be subdivision and development most promise of potable residential water supply water Consider minimum parcel size of 2‐4 hectares for self‐serviced Surface water run‐off results lots together with VCH in erosion in areas of steep and terrain, loose soil and sparse Consider density limitation of vegetation one dwelling unit per 2‐4 hectares for self‐serviced lots

Localized marshes or wetlands Areas of wet upland and lakes Development permit areas to should be disturbed only after protect sensitive wetlands and consideration has been given to avoid risk of erosion and flood downstream erosion and flooding downstream Lund and Thulin Lakes play an possibilities important role in the Lund Policies to protect Lund watershed reserve Lakes of the area not suited to watershed and discourage intensive recreational use, especially power boats and float cabins lakes of the Lund watershed

Soils Peninsula does not have Areas of thin soils or no soil cover Policies to discourage future significant areas of soil depth are not ideal for intensive land use development in areas with and nature suitable for cash of any sort, subject to erosion and steep slopes and thin or no soil crop agriculture septic tank field sites difficult to cover locate. Much of the peninsula is too Policies to promote retention of steeply sloped, rocky and Areas of shallow soils are stable with native vegetation and forest rugged to retain a good vegetation and forest cover cover mantel of soil Steeply sloping terrain subject to erosion with removal of vegetation Consider development permit Areas at the foot of slopes or in areas for natural hazard areas depressions could become sewage sinks if intensive residential Policies to support local food development depended on septic production within the ALR and tanks flat lands with deeper soils Deeper mineral soils occupy Policies to encourage future the lower slopes and flat Areas of deep mineral soils present residential development on

26 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan lowlands no obstacles to development lower slopes and flat lands Climate Mild maritime climate Mild climate has little impact on land use

Higher precipitation in winter Winter rains can lead to erosion in Policies to promote retention of areas of steep slopes and shallow or native vegetation and forest thin soils cover in areas of steep slopes and shallow or thin soils

Vegetation and Forests Areas of deep mineral soils Natural vegetation in areas of are densely covered by deeper soils is a hindrance to coniferous forest and shrubs agriculture

Forest cover consists predominantly of Douglas fir, Forest resource is valuable red cedar and western hemlock Wildlife Deer, racoon, rodents, beaver, Animal movement on and off the otter, mink peninsula is somewhat hindered by Several species of eagle and human settlement in the southern Policies to promote protection hawk, osprey, peregrine area of a wildlife corridor at the falcon, ducks, geese, swan south end of Okeover Inlet Most important point of access is south end of Okeover Inlet Freshwater Fisheries Non‐anadromous cutthroat Maintenance of freshwater fisheries trout in many lakes, streams requires careful and sensitive and rivers attention to how land is developed Development permit provisions to protect riparian areas / fish Anadromous cutthroat trout Sensitive areas should be buffered habitat at estuary and stream at mouths of streams and and negative impacts from runoff areas rivers and sanitation systems should be avoided Steelhead trout in Theodosia River

Marine Environment Marine waters, bays and inlets Important recreational resources Policies to support protection of unique features, marine parks Chinook, coho, ling cod, rock and recreation fish, oysters, clams Important fisheries resources

Protection and enhancement of Policies to support protection salmon spawning creeks (Okeover, and enhancement of salmon

27 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Sliammon and Theodosia) requires spawning creeks careful and sensitive attention to how land is developed

Conservation of marine water Policies to promote quality and shellfish habitat in inlets conservation of marine water also requires careful and sensitive quality in the inlets and attention to how land is developed establish “no dump zone” in Malaspina Complex

Policies to promote protection of shellfish habitat

Powell River Regional District Tsunami Report (2007) This report was completed for the Powell River Regional District with funding from the BC Provincial Emergency Program following the devastating tsunamis in Indonesia and the Indian Ocean in 2004.

Powell River Regional District is not at significant risk from a devastating tsunami wave or series of waves. Four mechanisms that could generate tsunami waves in the Strait of Georgia have been identified but do not appear to generate wave heights that would cause significant physical damage to Regional District beach areas, foreshore, protective sea walls or marinas. Maximum tsunami wave heights in the upper Strait of Georgia and Malaspina Strait appear not to exceed 1.0 metre. A combination of extreme high tides, onshore winds and a concurrent tsunami wave would cause localized flooding and beach or bank erosion in low lying areas along some island and mainland foreshores. A number of recommendations regarding emergency management planning and the need for more definitive information on inundation potential are made in this study.

The issue of localized flooding and beach or bank erosion in low lying areas could be addressed in the Area A OCP with the inclusion of policies to promote coastal land use and development that meets provincial standards for setbacks from the sea and/or possible development permit areas where detailed assessments would be required on a site specific basis prior to any new development.

Powell River Regional District RAR Implementation Report (2008) This report was completed by Landworks Consultants Inc. for the Powell River Regional District to provide options to implement the provincial Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR). The need for this report was precipitated by amendments to Part 26 of the Local Government Act in 2006 that require local governments to implement the provincial RAR and protect riparian areas and fish habitat.

The study reviewed all of the official community plan and zoning bylaws in effect in the Powell River Regional District and determined they fall short of meeting the legislative requirements to implement the RAR. The study also reviewed approaches to RAR implementation used by fifteen local governments on Vancouver Island and elsewhere in BC. Most local governments contacted indicated their Councils and Boards had adopted Development Permit policies to implement the RAR. An analysis of Powell River Regional District planning documents, legal opinions and the approaches used in other

28 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan jurisdictions form the basis of recommending that the Regional District use Development Permits to implement the RAR.

The Powell River Regional District has implemented this recommendation in all official community plan (OCP) amendments and updates completed since 2008. To date, Development Permit Areas and policies to protect riparian areas have been included in the following:

 Bylaw No. 306.2, 2009 to amend Lund Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 306, 1998;  Area B Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 465, 2012; and  Area C Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 467, 2012.

Development Permit Areas and policies to protect riparian areas should be included in the Area A OCP.

Theodosia Watershed Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations Plan (2012) This report was prepared by Patrick Little for the Theodosia Stewardship Roundtable with funding from Natural Resource Canada and Living Rivers. The report was compiled for the Theodosia (Tohkwonon) Stewardship Roundtable to document past and future challenges related to watershed stewardship and restoration and to suggest future steps towards adaptation to climate change. The report aims to inform future decisions on resource management and land use planning. Findings provide a local perspective on predicted climate change impacts and adaptation planning that has relevance across this region.

Projected climate change impacts to the Powell River region by the 2050’s can be summarized as follows:

 Dryer and hotter summers  Average summer temperatures will increase by up to 3  C  Average summer precipitation will decrease by up to 25%  More heat waves and more year to year variability (less predictable weather)  Wetter, rainier winters  Average winter temperatures will increase up to 2.5  C  Average winter precipitation will increase up to 13%  Average winter snowfall will decrease by 25‐60% less  More large winter rain storms and increased peak stream flow  Sea level rise of approximately 1 metre by 2100

Key recommendations in the report that should be considered addressed and supported in some way within the Area A OCP include:

Issue Climate Change Adaptation Area A OCP Considerations Recommendation Options More large winter rain Avoid flood zones Policies to promote land use and storms and increased peak development that meets provincial stream flows may result in standards

29 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan increased risk of flooding in floodplains and drainages Possible development permit areas where detailed geotechnical assessments required on a site specific basis More large winter rain Avoid land slide zones Policies to discourage future storms and increased peak development in steep slope areas stream flows may result in without detailed geotechnical increased risk of land slides assessments in areas of steep and unstable slopes Possible development permit areas where detailed assessments required on a site specific basis Sea level is anticipated to Prepare for sea level rise Policies to promote land use and rise by approximately 1 development in the coastal zone metre in the next century that meets provincial standards

Possible development permit areas where detailed geotechnical assessments required on a site specific basis

Identification of Natural Hazard Areas Malaspina Peninsula / Okeover Inlet (2013) This report was prepared by Marion Blank of Planterra Environmental Consulting for the Powell River Regional District. The report describes the findings from an overview geotechnical survey to determine natural hazard areas (steep and unstable slopes) along the coastline north of Teeshohsum (Sliammon IR #1). The project area encompasses lands along the shoreline of Malaspina Peninsula including the west side of Okeover Inlet and private land parcels on the east side of Okeover Inlet. Lands designated as Park or Tla’amin Lands were not included in the study area.

The study identified natural hazard areas that may impact present and/or future development in this area. General recommendations are based on the geology and its associated landforms, slope and drainage. Specific recommendations for development permit areas are based on the observation of current active erosional processes, surficial geology, observable groundwater levels and drainage patterns.

There are six important issues and recommendations in the report that should be considered and supported in some way within the Area A OCP.

Issue Natural Hazard Areas Study Area A OCP Considerations Recommendation Options

Natural features prone to land Create development permit area Designate as development failures in Atrevida area to ensure future development permit area not at risk from steep unstable Require further geotechnical

30 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

slopes mapping and information collection on site specific basis

Risk of possible flooding in Complete analysis of catch basin Designate as development Emmonds Beach area features and storm surge permit area modelling prior to future development Require further geotechnical mapping and information collection on site specific basis

Active storm surge / shoreline Complete detailed shoreline Policies to promote coastal land erosion in low bank waterfront assessment by a qualified marine use and development that meets properties engineer to determine present provincial standards and future risk to low‐lying developments Possible development permit areas where detailed assessments required on a site specific basis

Developments within the tidal Complete detailed assessment Policies to promote coastal land zone by a qualified marine engineer to use and development that meets determine potential erosional provincial standards impacts on adjacent shoreline Possible development permit areas where detailed assessments required on a site specific basis

Unstable slope in Okeover Dock Establish a plan to address rock Policies to support long‐term area fall hazard and long‐term stable stable access to Okeover Dock road access to Okeover Dock in cooperation with Okeover Policies to promote Harbour Authority and Ministry collaboration with local agencies of Transportation

Steep slopes can become Complete detailed assessment of Policies to discourage future unstable under certain surficial geology and drainage in development in areas with steep conditions areas of steep slopes prior to slopes future development Possible development permit areas where detailed assessments required on a site specific basis

31 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

2.2 First Nations

Protocol Agreement for Communication and Cooperation (2004) This agreement was negotiated between the Tla’amin First Nation and Powell River Regional District. The motivation for the agreement was a desire to build a long‐term cooperative government to government relationship for the purposes of sharing information, improving communication, addressing specific concerns and building an understanding of Tla’amin and Regional District governing structures, traditions, roles and responsibilities.

Fundamental principles of the agreement include an acknowledgement that:

 interests of both communities are best served by working together in a spirit of communication and cooperation;  most settlement area within Regional District boundaries has been built upon lands within Tla’amin traditional territory, reserve lands or treaty settlement lands;  establishing a government to government relationship now will create a level of certainty for our neighbouring communities and jurisdictions now rather than waiting for the outcome of treaty negotiations. Shared interests from the agreement that should be supported in some way by the Area A OCP include:

Shared Interests Protocol Agreement Area A OCP Considerations Options Recommendation

Desire to build a long‐ Establish Government to Acknowledge and respect existing term cooperative Government Working Committee protocol agreement in plan government to comprised of political appointments government and/or staff to foster Arrange for regular meetings between relationship communication and cooperation Tla’amin and RD planning staff throughout planning process to share information and foster understanding and respect of community interests

Culture and heritage Work together and explore Include Tla’amin history and cultural protection interests in plan

Policies to support protection of culture and heritage sites

Environmental Work together and explore Include Tla’amin environmental protection interests in plan

Policies to support protection of environment

32 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Economic sustainability Work together and explore Include Tla’amin economic sustainability interests in plan

Policies to support economic sustainability

Land use planning Work together and explore Policies to support harmonization and compatible land uses along boundaries

Shared / reciprocal Work together and explore Policies to support harmonization and services compatible land uses along boundaries

Policies to support future service agreements where appropriate

Sliammon/Powell River Regional District Harmonization Project Final Report (2008) This report was prepared by Ecoplan International for the Sliammon First Nation and Powell River Regional District. The purpose of the project was to identify opportunities for coordinating land use planning between the Powell River Regional District and the Sliammon First Nation, particularly around potential treaty settlement lands between Sliammon and Lund. The project resulted in a list of 21 recommendations for both governments to consider including in any new land use plans developed for the region.

General recommendations from the report include:

 Amend the 2004 Sliammon – PRRD Protocol Agreement for Communication and Cooperation to reflect growing relationship of the parties and to incorporate recommendations from project;  Activate the Sliammon – PRRD working committee identified in the Protocol Agreement to ensure that harmonization recommendations are implemented;  Amend existing PRRD and Sliammon plans when practical and feasible and utilize harmonization policies; and  Utilize harmonization policies in Sliammon Draft Final Agreement where necessary.

Specific issues and recommendations from the report that should be considered and supported in some way within the Area A OCP include:

Issue Harmonization Project Area A OCP Considerations Recommendation Options

Government to Government Activate the Sliammon – PRRD Acknowledge and respect existing Working Committee comprised working committee identified protocol agreement in plan of political appointments and/or in the Protocol Agreement to

33 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan staff to foster communication ensure that harmonization Arrange for regular meetings and cooperation has not been recommendations are between Tla’amin and RD planning established implemented staff throughout planning process to share information and review harmonization recommendations applicable to OCP/land use plan

Coode Peninsula has Resubmit joint application to Policies and actions to establish environmental and cultural province to establish Coode Wilderness Preservation values that need to be protected Wilderness Preservation Area Area

Policies to promote collaboration with First Nations and local agencies like MFLNRO

Thulin Passage has land use Revise Sliammon Land & Thulin Passage is not part of constraints including access and Resource Management Plan to Tla’amin Lands environmentally sensitive areas include more detailed information on permitted uses PRRD has initiated a new OCP and densities process for Area A

Create Malaspina Peninsula OCP

Agricultural Land is important to Share results of agricultural Policies and actions to support protect and enhance for food studies being carried out by findings from “Agricultural security Sliammon and PRREDS when Capability Assessment of Sliammon completed Treaty Settlement Lands” and “Economic Development Plan for Agriculture”

Boundary areas and isolated Map boundary areas between Map land status and accurately parcels and neighbourhoods PRRD and Sliammon treaty identify jurisdictional boundaries around Wilde Road, Craig Road lands between Tla’amin Lands and Area and Malaspina Road will require A harmonized planning and Consider using performance servicing to avoid incompatible zoning for boundary areas in Policies to support harmonization land uses revised/new land use plans and avoid incompatible land uses and OCPs Consider performance zoning following OCP development

Okeover Inlet is an area with Province should Policies and actions to support

34 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan many competing land uses amend/reopen Malaspina / management objectives in including mariculture, Okeover Coastal Plan to Malaspina / Okeover Coastal Plan recreation, residential, forestry improve implementation and and establishment of “no dumping enforcement zone” for inlet

Jointly pursue “no dumping Policies to promote collaboration zone” for inlet with local agencies with enforcement authority

Hurtado Point has land use Revise Sliammon Land & Map land status and accurately constraints including Resource Management Plan to identify jurisdictional boundaries environmentally sensitive areas include more detailed between Tla’amin Lands and Area recreational use by the public information on permitted uses A and densities and public access for recreation Policies to support harmonization and compatible land uses along Create Malaspina Peninsula boundaries OCP with compatible land uses on adjacent lands

Lund is located on the site of an Jointly develop a Lund Village Designate Lund Village Centre a important and historic Sliammon Centre Plan development permit area with village design guidelines to preserve and Establish a Lund Planning enhance rural coastal character Group Policies to support harmonization Establish Design Guidelines for and compatible land uses in village Lund Village Centre centre

Develop a Comprehensive Policies to ensure Comprehensive Service Agreement Service Agreement between PRRD and Sliammon

Tla’amin Land Use Plan (2010) This plan was prepared by Ecoplan International for the Tla’amin Nation. The Tla’amin Land Use Plan directs land use and development on Teeshohsum (Sliammon IR #1) and Ahgykson (Harwood Island IR #2). Teeshohsum is between the City of Powell River and Electoral Area A and is currently the only populated reserve. The Tla’amin Land Use Plan anticipates this area remaining the main area for residential and commercial development in the future.

The Tla’amin Nation is currently in the process of developing a new Land Use Plan for Tla’amin Lands that will encompass all reserve lands and treaty settlement lands. Their planning process is running concurrently with the Area A OCP planning process. It is anticipated that the new Land Use Plan will pick up on some similar themes from the 2010 Land Use Plan.

35 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

The Tla’amin Land Use Plan recognizes the need for land use harmonization and states a commitment to working with neighbouring jurisdictions to ensure land uses in Teeshohsum and on Ahgykson do not conflict with those in neighbouring jurisdictions and vice versa. The plan acknowledges and respects the existing protocols established with the Powell River Regional District and the City of Powell River. The following protocols and planning initiatives with the Regional District are specifically acknowledged and should also be considered in the context of the Area A OCP process:

 Sliammon – Powell River Regional District Harmonization Project (2008); and  Sliammon – Powell River Regional District Protocol Agreement for Communication and Cooperation (2004). With respect to water and sewer services, the Tla’amin Land Use Plan states the intent to expand sewer and water servicing along Highway 101 to provides services from end to end of Teeshohsum. The plan also envisions future sewage treatment facilities could be improved and expanded to provide fee‐for‐ service sewage treatment to properties located to the north of Teeshohsum along Highway 101 and within the jurisdiction of the Powell River Regional District.

Tla’amin Final Agreement (2011) The Tla’amin Final Agreement is a treaty negotiated between the governments of the Tla’amin Nation, British Columbia and Canada. The Final Agreement includes provisions for self‐governance, approximately 8,322 hectares of treaty settlement lands, treaty rights to harvest natural resources (fisheries, wildlife, migratory birds, plants), community forest tenures, aquaculture tenures, freshwater licenses, fish and wildlife management, cultural and heritage stewardship, resource revenue sharing, and cash.

The Tla’amin Final Agreement has been ratified by the Tla’amin Nation, the Province of BC and the Government of Canada. When the Tla’amin Final Agreement Treaty takes effect in April 2016, the Tla’amin Nation will be the largest land owner in the Powell River region and will represent a new order of government in the region. The treaty land package consists of approximately 8,322 hectares of treaty settlement lands (70 kilometres of waterfront) known as Tla’amin Lands. Tla’amin Lands include:

 1,197 hectares of former Sliammon Indian Reserves (Teeshohsum, Ahgykson, Theodosia, Okeover, Grace Harbour and Cortes Island (outside Powell River Regional District)  6,405 hectares of former provincial Crown lands, mostly in Electoral Area A north of Teeshohsum in Okeover, Theodosia, Lund and on Savary Island. Tla’amin lands are also located in Electoral Area B south of Haslam Lake, in Electoral Area D in Pocahontas Bay on Texada Island and in the City of Powell River on Wharf Street and Tanner Avenue.

Tla’amin Lands will be transferred to the Tla’amin Nation as of effective date of the treaty. The lands will be owned by the Tla’amin Nation in fee simple and will be registered in the provincial land title system. With the exception of the parcels on Savary Island and Wharf Street, the Tla’amin Nation will have law‐making authority with respect to management, planning, zoning and development on Tla’amin Lands. Provincial and federal laws will also apply to all land owned by Tla’amin.

36 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Chapter 16 of the Final Agreement outlines Local and Regional Government Relations. Section 5, 6 and 7 from this chapter should be referenced in the Area A OCP:

5. The Tla’amin Nation may enter into agreements with Local Government with respect to the provision and delivery of:

a) Local Government Services to Tla’amin Lands; and

b) Tla’amin Nation’s services for lands under the jurisdiction of Local Government.

6. The Tl’amin Nation agrees that any service agreement with Local Government in effect on the Effective Date will remain in effect until such time as it is renegotiated or is terminated under the terms of the agreement.

7. The Tla’amin Nation and Local Governments may establish and maintain agreements that set out principles, procedures and guidelines for the management of their relationship. The matters that may be governed by such agreements include the following:

a) protection of culture and heritage interests;

b) coordination and compatibility of land use planning, water use and watershed planning, including regulating land use, enforcement of regulations and development;

c) coordination and compatibility of property tax structures;

d) coordination and harmonization of the development of infrastructure including transportation;

e) cooperative economic development including recreation and tourism;

f) environmental protection and stewardship; and

g) dispute resolution.

2.3 Sustainability

A Sustainability Charter for the Powell River Region (2010) The Sustainability Charter for the Powell River Region is a product of citizens, community leaders and local agencies including City of Powell River, Powell River Regional District, Tla’amin Nation, Vancouver Island University, School District 47 and Catalyst Paper. About 300 community members participated in the creation of the Charter at a Community Forum. The Charter was endorsed and signed by the City of Powell River, the Powell River Regional District and the Tla’amin Nation in July 2010.

The Vision created by the group states:

“Powell River is a strong, independent West Coast community, proud of our ability to work well together. Diverse values and experiences are respected, and relationships are cherished. All our

37 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

basic needs are met and we have a rich social and cultural life that respects our history. We live in harmony with each other and with the natural environment, tending to its health while at work, at play and at home. We are stewards for the future.”

There are ten key sustainability principles contained in the Charter document that should be considered and supported in some way within the Area A OCP.

Principles Sustainability Charter Conclusion Area A OCP Considerations Options

Recognize and Recognize existing agreements and Review how treaty can mutually benefit respect Tla’amin demonstrate respect Tla’amin and Area A aboriginal rights, title and cultural history

Recognize ecological Design social and economic systems Promote new land use and development limits to recognize and respect indicators of that fits with ecological goals of ecological stress community

Take the long view Address urgent issues while also Ensure that sustainability goals are set, setting long‐term goals and adjusting measured and can be adjusted along the approach along the way way as impacts become evident, considering energy, water, soil, land, air and material use

Promote self‐ Embrace self‐reliance as an Encourage activities (local agricultural reliance important facet of long‐term production, water protection, community health, as a member of aquaculture/fisheries, renewable energy the global community sources) that promote self‐reliance

Integrate Recognize value of maintaining Ensure all elements of sustainability are quality of life with limited resources. considered And create efficient strategies that meet environmental, economic and social goals

Work together Collaborate and coordinate with one Engage as much as the community as another recognizing the value of possible in the OCP process bringing diverse perspectives to bear on problems, maximizing creativity, generating solutions and minimizing duplication

Learn continuously Continue to gain understanding of Ensure OCP is easy to update and

38 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

how natural world works and learn to considers opportunities to adapt to thrive in harmony with it changing circumstances

Strive for equality Recognize the inherent value of every Ensure social issues and accessibility of human being and work to support services is part of new OCP economic and social systems that strengthen equity

Manage uncertainty Exercise caution and take action to Include policies that ensure land use and safeguard the environment and development do not compromise the society environment

Consider local and Remember that actions and choices Consider energy and other materials global sustainability have impacts here and elsewhere and consumption include policies that act accordingly promote energy efficiency and waste reduction

2.4 Economic Development

The Malaspina Okeover Coastal Plan (2004) This plan was prepared by the Coast and Marine Planning Branch of the provincial Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management with the intent of strengthening the economy of rural communities. The planning process included a consultative process with Powell River Regional District, First Nations, interest groups, stakeholders and industry associations. The final plan was endorsed by both Powell River Regional District and the Sliammon First Nation.

The motivation for the plan was the fact that many coastal communities in BC were experiencing significant economic decline and population loss due to reduction in industrial forestry and commercial fishing activity. Many coastal communities were looking for opportunities to diversify and expand their economies while protecting sensitive resources and values, and the Malaspina Okeover was one of those communities.

The Malaspina Okeover area supports a range of economic activities including commercial fisheries, shellfish aquaculture, log handling and storage, marine transportation, public and commercial recreation as well as upland residential development and an array of sensitive resources and First Nations cultural resources. The plan was developed to address conflict issues associated with this mix of resource uses. Recommendations contained in the plan are intended to assist provincial agencies when considering applications for coastal tenure and assist local government, first nations and communities by identifying opportunities for sustainable development, conservation and recreation. The plan is also intended to provide a useful tool for developers and entrepreneurs by identifying in advance the opportunities for Crown land and marine uses within the Malaspina Okeover Area.

39 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

The plan identifies seven planning units within the Malaspina Okeover area, and each planning unit has recommended uses and a recommended management emphasis. Planning unit recommended uses and management emphases should be considered within the Area A OCP planning process. Maps of the planning units are available in the 2004 Malaspina Okeover Coastal Plan.

Planning Unit Coastal Plan Coastal Plan Area A OCP Recommended Uses Recommended Considerations Management Emphasis Options Malaspina Inlet North ‐Shellfish sub‐tidal Recreational Land use aquaculture designations and ‐Conservation policies to support ‐Marine telecommunication utilities ‐Commercial recreation guiding Malaspina Inlet South ‐Shellfish sub‐tidal General Marine Land use aquaculture designations and ‐Conservation policies to support ‐Marine telecommunication utilities ‐Commercial recreation guiding Trevenen Bay ‐Conservation Aquaculture Land use ‐Marine designations and telecommunication policies to support utilities Okeover Inlet West ‐Shellfish sub‐tidal Recreational Land use aquaculture designations and ‐Conservation policies to support ‐Marine telecommunication utilities ‐Private residential moorage Okeover Inlet East ‐Shellfish beach General Marine Land use aquaculture designations and ‐Shellfish off bottom policies to support aquaculture ‐Shellfish sub‐tidal aquaculture ‐Conservation ‐Public and institutional docks ‐Marine telecommunication

40 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

utilities Lancelot Inlet ‐Shellfish beach General Marine Land use aquaculture designations and ‐Shellfish off bottom policies to support aquaculture ‐Shellfish sub‐tidal aquaculture ‐Conservation ‐Public and institutional docks ‐Marine telecommunication utilities ‐Private residential moorage Theodosia Inlet ‐Shellfish off bottom General Marine Land use aquaculture designations and ‐Shellfish sub‐tidal policies to support aquaculture ‐Conservation ‐Public and institutional docks ‐Marine telecommunication utilities

Powell River Regional District Growth and Development Analysis (2008) This report was prepared by Vannstruth Consulting Group & Landworks Consultants for the Powell River Regional District. The intent of the report is to provide a realistic assessment of how growth is likely to occur in the regional district over the next 20 years. Two scenarios were prepared with different assumptions concerning the nature of migration to the regional district.

The first scenario is called the Baseline Scenario and it generally follows BC Stats projections. Due to the aging population, a serious labour shortage is anticipated which will force some businesses to downsize and demand to shrink. Only the senior’s age group will increase in size.

The second scenario is called the Worker Migration Scenario and it assumes that as labour shortages start to develop, additional working age migrants and their families will move into the region to fill the gap. Under this scenario, the Powell River Regional District population would increase by 10% although housing demand would increase by 17% due to smaller family sizes of the aging demographic and continued demand for recreational housing. This is a more optimistic scenario but faces the challenge of completion for skilled workers in other parts of BC and Canada.

Under either scenario, the supply of commercial and industrial land can easily be accommodated by the existing vacant land inventory. The demand for residential land is expected to range between 40 and 90

41 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan dwelling units annually depending on which scenario is used. This demand for residential land can be met under either scenario although the type and location may vary.

Key recommendations from the report that are relevant to the new Area A OCP include:

 Anticipate and plan for increased growth on smaller lots where water and sewer services are available  Plan for services that reflect the needs of an aging population such as public transit, health and wellness services, care facilities and more passive recreation facilities  Maintain and support continued use of industrial areas of strategic importance to the region’s economic base such as waterfront forestry operations  Encourage clustering of new residential lots in appropriate residentially zoned and serviced areas with waterfront access or water views where community benefits / amenities such as trails, parks, green space and preservation of sensitive ecosystems.

Economic Development Plan for Agriculture (2009) This plan was prepared by Gary Rolstan and Simon Pritchard from Ground Up Resource Consultants Inc. for the Powell River Regional Economic Development Society. The report describes the current state of the agricultural industry within the Powell River Regional District and outlines a number of objectives and action items for economic development of the agricultural sector.

The report noted that the agricultural sector faces significant challenges including a small local market of less than 20,000, two ferry trips from major markets, lack of a licensed plant for meat processing and high transportation costs for fertilizer. Less than 80 farms were identified with 85% generating revenues less than $25,000 in 2005. The average was $22,600. Required sales to break even were indicated to be $40,000 annually. Average reported revenue per hectare in the Powell River Regional District was only $1,185 in 2005, barely one quarter of that in the Comox Valley. The authors reported that overall, farms are not economically sustainable and were clearly supported by non‐farm income.

On the other hand, the industry has significant potential for increased production due to the large amount of unused agricultural land. The climate is excellent, irrigation water supplies can be developed fairly easily and the range of agricultural crops is large. The demand for local food is growing rapidly. Local food production currently represents less than 3% of local food consumption. Also nearly half of farms reported organic production although very few are certified.

Areas where the new Area A OCP can address agriculture include policies to encourage agricultural production inside and outside the ALR, incentives such as the 100 mile diet and promoting local food security. facilities for food processing such as a local abattoir.

Powell River Regional Business Inventory (2013) This inventory was prepared by the Powell River Regional Economic Development Society for the Powell River Regional District. The inventory contains all businesses operating in Electoral Areas A, B, C D and E in the Powell River Regional District. The businesses within the inventory advertise their services and/or products in some way – either through an online presence or physical signage, or both. Any errors or

42 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan omissions are purely accidental as efforts were made to ensure that all businesses were represented accurately. The following research methods were used to inventory businesses:

• Executive Pulse Data Base • Physically driving/cycling around every road in the region (except Lasqueti Island) and noting each advertised business • Internet‐based and other searches including: o Powell River Direct o City of Powell River 2013 Business License List o 2012 Powell River Access Guide o Lund Business Directory Online o Texada Business Directory Online o www.manta.com o www.profilecanada.com o www.411.ca o www.canada411.ca o http://www.silts.ca/pdfs/visitorguide.pdf o http://www.powellriverrealestate.net/brandy‐peterson‐powell‐river‐real‐estate/powell‐ river‐manufactured‐home‐parks/ o Lasqueti Business Directory: www.lasqueti.ca o 2012 Texada Phone Book o Yellow Pages – www.yellowpages.ca o Texada’s Express Lines October 2013 o Canada Profile Listing o Powell River Chamber of Commerce Member Directory o Powell River Tourism Member Directory o Google

Exploring policy options for supporting local businesses and growing a sustainable local economy will be an important part of the official community planning process.

43 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

2.5 Parks and Recreation

Regional District Parks and Greenspace Plan (2010) This plan was prepared by HB Lanarc Consultants Ltd. for the Powell River Regional District. Plan objectives included: protect areas of significant ecological value; ensure the availability of public areas for passive and active recreation for future generations; preserve and enhance the region’s aesthetic (scenic) qualities for the enjoyment of local and visiting public; and develop a parks and greenspace acquisition strategy.

Within Electoral Area A, the inventory of parks and greenspace includes:

 Craig Road Regional Park  Okeover Arm Provincial Park  Desolation Sound Marine Park  Copeland Islands Marine Park  Malaspina Provincial Park  Dinner Rock Recreation Site  Appleton Creek Recreation Site / Trail  Sunshine Coast Trail

Key themes in the plan relevant to Area A OCP include:

 Reviewing status of community site of interest for future park acquisition ‐ Orpana Lakes.  Enhancing waterfront access.  Developing a comprehensive trail system to support a wide variety of recreational trails for activities such as walking, hiking, biking, horseback riding and motorized vehicle use.  Reviewing status of application for passive wilderness area designation ‐ Coode Peninsula.  Protecting sensitive ecosystems and wildlife habitat as a fundamental priority including protection of overall biodiversity, salmon habitat, old growth forest, wildlife corridors, ecological greenway, riparian habitat and protecting cultural and heritage sites.  Developing an inventory of culturally significant sites and strategies to preserve them.  Implementing property tax exemptions for environmental conservation purposes.  Developing a structure to encourage fundraising, donations, commemorative giving and/or in‐ kind donation for parks and greenspace.  Work with First Nations to develop protocol agreements where recreational resources are located on treaty settlement lands.

2.6 Community

Lund Official Community Plan (1998) This Official Community Plan (OCP) The Lund OCP sets out a vision for how the Lund community wish to evolve in the future. The 1998 plan sets out community goals, objectives and policies regarding existing

44 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan and future land use and development as well as social and environmental considerations applicable to the planning area.

A couple of amendments were made to the OCP in more recent years to ensure compliance with OCP requirements under the Local Government Act. These amendments include: the addition of Development Permit Areas to support the protection of sensitive riparian areas in 2010; and the addition of targets and policies to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in 2012.

Although the Lund OCP was created over 15 years ago, a review of the OCP indicates there is a fair amount of contextual information in the background report section (pages 1‐16) that is still relevant and has been incorporated into this Area A OCP Technical Background Report. The vision created by the Lund community in 1998 states:

“Lund residents wish to retain a small West Coast village character with a wide range of housing options and a strong local economy, while minimizing negative impact on the natural environment and retaining the area’s natural character and aesthetics.

Residents believe strongly in the rights of the individual and believe development should be able to take place with a minimum of government regulation and interference.”

The vision statement and many of the goals, objectives and policies set out in the Lund OCP should be reviewed and updated for the Area A OCP. The following table provides a general assessment for further consideration through the community planning process.

Lund OCP Components General Assessment for Area A OCP General Goals (pages 18‐20) Good starting point ‐ could retain for section of the OCP pertaining to Lund and expand to reflect goals of the wider Area A community

Could be improved by updating to incorporate principles from the 2010 Sustainability Charter Natural Environment Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise Objectives/Policies (pages 20‐21) Could be improved by linking to recommendations in 2010 Sustainability Charter. Vegetation Policies (pages 21‐ Could be improved by incorporating landscaping and screening policies 22) as is more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Climate Change Adaptation + Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise Mitigation Targets /Policies (pages 22‐23) Hazard Lands Policies (pages Needs updating to incorporate findings and recommendations from 23‐24) the 2013 Identification of Natural Hazard Areas Malaspina Peninsula / Okeover Inlet Report Water Resources Policies Needs updating to separate drinking water resource issues from (pages 24‐25) riparian areas protection issues

Needs updating to incorporate findings and recommendations from

45 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

the 2009 RAR Implementation Report under a separate section for Riparian Areas

Needs revision to be consistent with provincial legislation re: community watersheds, water supply systems and protection of drinking water as in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Coastal Zone Policies (pages Needs updating to incorporate findings and recommendations from 25‐26) the: 2013 Identification of Natural Hazard Areas Malaspina Peninsula / Okeover Inlet Report ; 2012 Theodosia Watershed Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations Plan; and 2007 Tsunami Report. Pollution Policies (Page 26) Could be improved by linking to recommendations in 2012 Vital Signs Report and 2010 Sustainability Charter. Archaeological Site Policies Needs updating to incorporate findings and recommendations from (Page 26‐27) 2008 Sliammon / Powell River Regional District Harmonization Project and more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Lund Village Centre Objectives Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise and Policies (pages 28‐29) Needs updating to incorporate findings and recommendations from 2008 Sliammon / Powell River Regional District Harmonization Project Harbour Development Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise Objectives and Policies (pages 29‐31) Needs updating to incorporate findings and recommendations from 2008 Sliammon / Powell River Regional District Harmonization Project Residential Use Objectives and Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise Policies (pages 31‐35) Needs updating to reflect larger planning area and larger range of residential properties without water or sewer services. Agriculture Policies (page 35‐ Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise 36) Lund Watershed Policies Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise (pages 36‐38) Resource Policies (page 38) Could be improved by incorporating some of the resource policies in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Vacant Crown Land Policies Outside RD jurisdiction (page 38‐39) Could be revised to be advocacy policies as in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Recreation Objectives and Needs updating to reflect recommendations and implemented actions Policies (page 39‐40) from Regional Parks and Greenspace Plan;

Could be improved by incorporating policies to harmonize with management objectives for lands adjacent to Provincial Parks in wider Area A community; and adding policy regarding park land dedication or funds in lieu Economy Objectives and Needs updating to reflect recommendations from 2012 Vital Signs Policies (page 40) Report; 2009 Economic Development for Agriculture; 2008 Regional

46 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Growth Analysis; and 2004 Malaspina Okeover Coastal Plan

Could also be improved by considering some of the economic policies in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Industry and Commerce (page Needs updating to reflect recommendations from 2012 Vital Signs 41‐42) Report; 2008 Regional Growth Analysis; and 2004 Malaspina Okeover Coastal Plan Could also be improved by considering some of the criteria for screening new applications for industry and commercial land uses as in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Commercial Recreation Needs updating to reflect recommendations from 2012 Vital Signs Objectives and Policies (page Report; 2010 Parks and Greenspace Plan; 2008 Regional Growth 43‐44) Analysis; and 2004 Malaspina Okeover Coastal Plan Forestry Policies (page 44) Outside RD jurisdiction

Could be improved by grouping this set of policies together with Resource policies and incorporating some of the resource policies in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD

Could add policies to encourage buffers between residential neighbourhoods and Privately Managed Forest Lands and provincial Crown lands. Fisheries and Aquaculture Outside RD jurisdiction Policy (page 44) Could be revised to be advocacy policies as in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Public Facilities/Services Good starting point ‐ could retain and/or revise Objectives and Policies (page 44‐45) Need to expand policy framework to reflect self‐serviced properties in wider Area A community

Could be improved by incorporating some of the water and sewer policies in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Institutions Policies (Page 45‐ Needs updating to reflect current and future demographics 46) Could be improved by incorporating some of the institutional policies in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Transportation Policies (page Needs updating to reflect recommendations from 2014 Regional 46‐47) Transportation Plan Development Permit Needs updating and should be consistent with development permit Provisions to Protection provisions in more recent Area B and C OCP bylaws adopted by the RD Riparian Areas (page 48‐52)

Powell River’s Vital Signs (2012) This report was completed by the Powell River Community Foundation. It is a check‐up of the Powell River Community, providing a snapshot of positive and negative trends on issues important to the community’s quality of life. The data in this report is a culmination of statistical sources (2006 and 2011

47 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Census) and a survey responded to by 685 community members across the region, including 45 from residents from of Electoral Area A. There are twelve key issues explored in the report that should be considered and supported in some way within the Area A OCP.

Issue Vital Signs Study Conclusion Area A OCP Considerations Options Economy Individual and family incomes less than Encourage economic diversification national and provincial averages and support knowledge based economy Gap between rich Child poverty in 2009 was above provincial Affordable housing policies & poor average Support for social services Powell River seniors are more dependent on basic income assistance than the provincial average Learning High school graduation rate lower than Make educational institutions easily provincial average accessible to alternative Low rate of university graduates transportation Support knowledge based economy Environment Significant GHG emissions from vehicle use Support alternative forms of and not enough headway to increase transportation recycling and reduce waste production Waste management policies to promote “zero waste” Health and Focus on local organic food and better Encourage community gardens and Wellness support for mental health services and farmers markets general health providers Support for mental health services Expand trail system and neighbourhood “walkability” Housing Shortage of affordable rental housing and Support increase in supply of rental housing stock aging and affordable rental housing Accommodate housing forms for an aging population Work 16% of labour force self‐employed Policies to support self‐ Future deficit of skilled educated workers employment, home‐based anticipated occupations and mixed use development Support for attracting skilled workers and educating community members Getting Started Increasingly diverse population and Recognize cultural and social attractive place for immigrants diversity Work to integrate young families into Identify needs of young families and economy and neighbourhoods provide supportive policies Safety Reputation for being a safe community Promote CEPTED ideas “eyes on the street” Belonging & Feeling of belonging and being accepted in Focus on engagement through OCP Leadership community life is high (74% rated good or process excellent) Recognize and respect First Nations Sliammon community still experiencing a history and culture

48 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

hard time being accepted Harmonize Area A OCP with Tla’amin Land Use Plan Arts, Culture & Amount and variety of cultural activities Focus on arts and culture Recreation rated high (80% rated excellent or good) employment opportunities Market Powell River as a lifestyle choice Transportation Issue of increasing ferry fares personal travel Ferry service outside scope of OCP and commerce Policies to promote alternative Heavy dependence on private vehicles transportation choices (transit, ride share Policies to promote active transportation for short trips (cycling and walking)

49 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

References

Acheson, S. & Riley, S., 1976. Report to the Lands Branch: Archaeological Survey of Malaspina Peninsula Study Area. BC Archaeological Sites Advisory Board.

Blank, Marion, 2013. Identification of Natural Hazard Areas Malaspina Peninsula / Okeover Inlet. Powell River Regional District.

Coast and Marine Planning Branch, 2004. The Malaspina Okeover Coastal Plan. BC Ministry of Sustainable Resource Management.

Dovetail Consulting Ltd., 2005. Draft Land and Water Use Plan for Tla’amin Traditional Territory. Tla’amin First Nation.

Ecoplan International, 2010. Tla’amin Land Use Plan. Tla’amin First Nation.

Ecoplan International, 2008. Sliammon / Powell River Regional District Harmonization Project Final Report. Sliammon First Nation.

EvEco Consultants, 2006. Agricultural Capability Assessment Sliammon Treaty Settlement Lands. Sliammon Treaty Society.

HB Lanarc Consultants, 2010. A Sustainability Charter for the Powell River Region. Powell River Regional District, City of Powell River, Sliammon First Nation.

HB Lanarc, Alof!i Consulting & Madrone Environmental Services, 2010. Regional District Parks and Greenspace Plan. Powell River Regional District.

ISL Engineering and Land Services, 2014. Powell River Regional Transportation Plan. Powell River Regional District.

Land Management Branch, Lower Mainland Region, 1979. Malaspina Master Plan. BC Ministry of the Lands, Parks and Housing.

Landworks Consultants Inc., 2008. Powell River Regional District RAR Implementation Report. Powell River Regional District.

Little, Patrick, 2012. Theodosia Watershed Climate Change Impacts and Adaptations Plan. Living Rivers, BC Conservation Foundation and Theodosia Stewardship Roundtable.

Lower Mainland Region Environmental Stewardship Division, 2008. Management Plan for Desolation Sound and Copeland Islands Marine Parks and Tux’wnech Okeover Arm Provincial Park. BC Parks.

Munro, W.W., 2012. Powell River Regional District and Unincorporated Areas Aggregated Population Projections. Powell River Regional District.

50 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Parks and Protected Areas Division, Lower Mainland Region, 2008. Management Plan for Malaspina Provincial Park. BC Parks.

Powell River Community Foundation, 2012. Powell River’s Vital Signs 2011 – 2012. Powell River Community Foundation.

Powell River Regional Economic Development Society, 2013. Powell River Regional Business Inventory. Powell River Regional District.

Powell River Regional District, 1998. Lund Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 306, 1998. Powell River Regional District.

Powell River Regional District, 2007. Powell River Regional District Tsunami Report. Provincial Emergency Program.

Rolston, Gary & Pritchard, Simon, 2009. Economic Development Plan for Agriculture. Powell River Regional Economic Development Society.

Sadlier‐Brown, T.L., 1999. An Evaluation of the Mineral Resources of the Sliammon Traditional Territory. Sliammon Treaty Society.

Tla’amin Nation, Canada and British Columbia, 2011. Tla’amin Final Agreement. Tla’amin Nation, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada and BC Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation.

Vannstruth Consulting Group & Landworks Consultants, 2008. Powell River Regional District Growth and Development Analysis Final Report. Powell River Regional District.

Washington, Michelle (Siemthlut), 2004. Yax utchw Kootegan Yix meh towlth Reflecting on Traditional Governance. Sliammon Treaty Society.

51 | Page

Revised Draft Technical Background Report ‐ Area A Official Community Plan

Map Appendices

52 | Page

Table of Contents