Dear Fellow Islanders,
As I listened to the working groups present their summaries at the April 28th OCP/LAP Working Meeting, I jotted down the issues that they had in common. I also jotted down the concerns that were expressed again and again in the question sessions. It's a fairly short list and it may point to a simple, widely acceptable path forward.
1) It is desirable that we create the potential for some smaller properties that would be more affordable and suitable to seniors and young islanders. However, growth needs to be managed carefully.
2) The work that the steering committees have done to date is appreciated and should be utilized.
3) The process needs more time. This one Director Abram is already taking back to the Regional District.
4) We need to reduce the scope of the project. Every working group stated that increased density should be focused first in the Cove and second in Heriot Bay (after a sewer system is in place) and that the rest of the island should be left zoned as is. Further, most groups indicated that even in the Cove and Heriot Bay the increase in density should be lower than that indicated on the maps presented and/ or that it should be staged so that growth does not happen too rapidly. I think that this is the most important suggestion that came out of the meeting. Significantly reducing the amount and rate of growth to be considered in this project would go a long way to addressing many of the other concerns expressed at the April 28th meeting and in general. It would reduce the risk of overtaxing our water supply, overloading our ferry and of growing faster than our other services can keep up with. It would even help keep the project short.
5) The process needs to proactively involve the whole island. While no one was expressly excluded, the structure of the project to-date made many people, especially those who live on the north end of the island feel excluded.
6) Four out of five working groups reported that our water supply and the lack of information about its capacity was a significant issue.
7) While village, cluster and multiple-unit housing will supply some more affordable housing, it will not result in low-cost housing.

That's the list. Here's my suggestions for how we move forward based on the list:
1) Put the past and our differences aside and move forward looking for some common ground.
2) Start with reducing the scope of the project to focus on the Cove and Heriot Bay and on the most affordable and suitable housing for seniors and young islanders.
3) Use a meeting format similar to, but more structured, than the April 28th meeting. Meet as a large group that breaks into working groups to work on specific issues then reassembles to compare results and make some decisions by consensus or by significant majority (75%?)
4) Ask for volunteers to take on the task of finding out how quickly and inexpensively we can find out the basic capacity of our aquifer. Given that, there are ways we can do a rough estimate of how many residents and visitors it can support. If measuring the size and recharge rate of our aquifer proves to take too long or cost too much to be done within this project, make a statement in the OCP in support of such a task and see if we can make it a project of it's own to be taken on by one of the volunteer organizations on the island.
5) Do the same thing for low-cost housing as for the water issue.
6) In making all decisions, consider not only the growth of the permanent resident population but all of our summer residents and visitors. Our "summer" population is our population for 35 to 40% of the year and has a major impact on most of our services...

Hope this is of some help,
Richard Desmarais