by Jennifer Smith - Vernon Morning Star posted Aug 29, 2014 at 1:00 AM— updated Aug 29, 2014 at 6:01 AM
Speculation that work on Cosens Bay Road will result in a two-lane highway through Kal Lake Park is just that, speculation, according to government officials. The Ministry of Transportation says it has no such plans for the road. All it wants to do is make the dirt road a bit safer to travel on and save itself some maintenance costs. “We have to maintain the road and we’re hearing from residents and users, and our road maintenance contractors, that it is not safe,” said Erik Lachmuth, area manager of roads for the ministry. Lachmuth repeatedly explained this to some of the dozens of individuals who packed the Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park open house Wednesday at the Prestige Hotel. The open house detailed plans for the proposed boundary adjustment the ministry is seeking from B.C. Parks in order to establish a 30-metre-wide right-of-way where Cosens Bay Road traverses the park. Passion over the issue was evident, as one individual raised his voice against the proposal, causing a response from some cabin owners. Despite speculation, the right-of-way is simply to allow the ministry to work on the more rugged, treed section of the road, says Lachmuth. “This isn’t what will spur development.” The work includes brushing (cutting trees back next to road) to improve sightlines, digging new ditches for proper drainage so the road doesn’t wash out as easily, add gravel to build up the road and install additional road safety signage. “Our annual maintenance costs on that road are really high,” said Lachmuth. “We have to bring in a grader three or four times more often than most other roads.” Although the ministry is mandated to take care of the road, it cannot do such work without the boundary adjustment. Phil McGrew lives eight months out of the year at his cabin at Cosens Bay and is eager to see improvements on the road, before someone is injured. “This isn’t about a 30-metre-wide roadway, it’s about some minor fixes,” said McGrew. “We don’t want 30 metres of paved road either.” Meanwhile, close to 1,500 signatures have been gathered on a Friends of Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park petition opposed to the plans. And there are other groups concerned. “We hike out there a lot and we’re very concerned about the wildlife,” said Robyn Thornton, with the North Okanagan Naturalists Club. Miranda Williams has concerns that this work could pave the way for future upgrades, such as demands for power and sewer to the cabins. “This is just the start,” she said, pointing out that the cabins used to be boat access only. “There shouldn’t even be a road.” Meanwhile, many of the cabin owners say they too respect the park and do not want to upset the delicate natural environment, they just want safe access to their cabins. “We are as much friends of the park as Friends of Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park are,” said Rob Johnston, spokesperson for 51 owners. Consultations will continue through the spring of 2015, after which an environmental impact assessment will be done and final application is submitted to B.C. Parks. It must then be passed in the Legislature.
5 comments:
Rather than be concerned about the limited improvement in the road through Cosen's Bay park, I would think the Rattle snakes would be of far greater concern if the Naturalist's are walking about in the area.
Dear Kalwest,
We naturalists have our eyes and ears open when we walk in the Park.
Not only that, some of us don't leave home without our trusty PandS cameras at the ready. Makes for some very interesting pictures of snakes, bears, deer, eagles etc. etc.
But yes, we are rather concerned about what MoTI (reacting to the push of some, apparently well connected, Cabin Owners) has in mind. Most of us can easily do without the wishy-washy answers that were served up at the "Information Session" on Aug 27th 2014. We like clear answers to very clear questions ... and those answers weren't forthcoming.
Hans-Joerg Mueller
Coldstream
This issue is much more complicated than just protecting snakes. Its about protecting human life and preventing serious injury to people. Much more important in my opinion. This road is not safe by MOT standards and even they are concerned for their contractors and staff working on this road. It is expensive to maintain and they need to fix it. Not sure who you are suggesting was wishy washy or why you would even suggest that. MOT did an excellent job at presenting the facts...you just don't want to hear them.
Let me put it this way [b] no one from MoTI could or would give me a clear answer why they need 30 meters, no one![/b]
I gladly listen to facts, it's the only way to use reductio ad absurdum to point out the BS they are trying to sell as facts.
We're not far enough along with these discussions, but I have a few zingers to present regarding that "Information event", some nice verbatim quotes. ;) :)
Hans-Joerg Mueller
Coldstream
PS Why do I sign my posts? I have nothing to hide!
As mentioned here comes the first zinger from that "Information" event.
My persistent questioning of the need for a 30 meter right of way, resulted in one BC government official stating that the 30m are not measured in a horizontal plane from the center line of the existing road, but are actually measured in a contour fashion following the slope/rise of the land.
That was/is one ill-informed BC government official, check http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/DA/L3_eval_access.asp#Right of Way Widths
While there duly note the official minimum for Right-of-Way Widths is 20 meters.
There are two ways to look at this: a) the official really doesn't/didn't know; b) was trying to side step my persistent questioning, of the need for a 30m Right-of-Way, by serving up the contour line.
Either way not good, not good at all.
As my friends and foes know trying to bamboozle HJ is a fool's quest.
Hans-Joerg Mueller
Coldstream
PS Sixteen years of Google searches are very educational if one delights in research. ;)
Post a Comment