Mostly Cloudy 15° C Mostly Cloudy

Area D OCP - Summary of Meetings


































Back to Area D OCP Review Home Page

Summary of OCP Public Consultation Meetings 

April 2017 Open Houses and Round Table Discussions

Over 80 Area D residents attended the two public open houses on Tuesday, April 11 and approximately 55 participated in the round table discussions on Tuesday, April 18 at the Oyster Bay Resort. 

The information presented at the open houses included: 

Participants submitted their feedback on comment sheets, post-it notes affixed to story boards, wrote on a flip chart and submitted and/or emailed in comments following the meetings. Additionally, the April 18 round table discussions were recorded and summarized by the table facilitators.

Generally, discussions and comments received showed support for the draft policies presented at the open houses.  The public input received is provided in a general summary below, however, a complete compilation of public comments and roundtable discussions is available here.

Land Use Designations and Lot Size

  • There was general support for a Rural Residential land use designation which would allow for 5 – 10 acre lots as a transition between the larger country residential lots and the very large upland resource parcels. 
  • All three April 18 discussion rounds supported lot sizes of 5 to 10 acres and the additions of the agriculture and rural residential designations.
  • Many participants specifically asked for additional 5 acre parcels.
  • Several participants asked for more 2.5 acre or smaller lot sizes.
  • Storm water drainage was a concern and participants suggested that new lots be required to manage stormwater effectively.
  • A couple of Craig Road area residents who left comments did not wish to see additional density in their neighbourhood where lots are already 2.5 to 5.0 acres in area.

Housing Options

  • There was strong support for the new OCP policies to increase housing options and, in particular, facilitate the potential for secondary dwellings and carriage houses. 
  • There were no comments opposing additional housing options.
  • During the round table discussions, participants suggested that there be more housing options for seniors such as smaller homes within a strata with a communal hall, gardens and other amenities. 
  • While participants at all three round table discussions strongly supported housing options, a number pointed out that additional housing should depend on water supply and septic capacity.  This is supported by the proposed OCP policies.


  • There was support for the new agriculture designation and associated policies.
  • Residents asked to protect agricultural land for food production, as supported by the new draft policies in the OCP.
  • During the round table discussions, participants supported the new OCP policies discouraging medical marijuana production facilities (MMPF).  For certain, any negative impacts on surrounding properties should be mitigated.
  • Participants generally agreed with the OCP policies that support agri-tourism as permitted by the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC), but wanted a limit on size and footprint of the agri-tourism accommodations.  The OCP policies support agri-tourism and the regulations within the zoning bylaw can further regulate the ALC’s agri-tourism provisions such as size and number of units.  
  • A number of participants suggested there also be smaller lot sizes for smaller farms.

Environmental Protection

  • Several participants emphasized the importance of retaining trees and not clearcutting rural lands.
  • Residents wanted to see the protection of an eagle’s nest off Craig Road.  Eagles’ nests are protected in the OCP through Environmentally Sensitive Areas Development Permits in areas surrounding eagle nests.
  • Increased recycling options, being one of the new OCP policies, were supported by residents.

Parks and Trails

Parks and trails were popular topics overall. 

  • While the Hagel Park playground replacement was not specifically mentioned on the story boards, a number of participants left comments stating that they wished to see the playground replacement project go ahead. 
  • Opinions on the development of Hagel Greenway were divided.  Two residents specifically noted their desire to see the trail within Hagel Greenway constructed, while two direct neighbours to the greenway expressed their concern over the proposed development of the SRD’s right-of-way indicating it would compromise their privacy.
  • Many residents mentioned their support for the SRD to continue to negotiate with the private landowner whose land the Pub to Pub trail crosses, to re-open the trail.  They also wanted improvements to Oyster River Nature Park.
  • Overall, participants wanted to see more access to formalized trails on forestry lands and wanted the SRD to add to the trails network within Area D and supported the OCP in its policies to promote trail development and the creation of an integrated trail system.
  • Residents wanted to have the ability to travel from Oyster River to Campbell River by trail. Residents agreed with the OCP policy that supports the water line trail (largely located within the boundaries of the City of Campbell River).  
  • Residents commented on the need for more recreational facilities for kids at Maple Park.  During the round table discussion, the suggestion was made for phased development for Maple Park including a playground, community centre, gardens, trails and sports fields.  The updated OCP  policies support a master planning process for Maple Park to get community input on future amenities within the park.
  • One suggestion was for a bike jump park in Area D similar to what exists in Cumberland and on Quadra Island.
  • Comments were left that encouraged improvements to drainage of the Hagel Park playing field and to formalize the access to Hagel Park from Craig Road and improve visibility at the York Road entrance.
  • Other comments included fences or screening for neighbours adjacent to linear parks/trail corridors, a trail map of Area D, better cycling infrastructure, a cross-walk to get to Stories Beach, increased focus on park maintenance, and the need for a parks master plan for Area D to identify park priorities.
  • A few residents expressed their concern about ATV’s using residential roads to reach logging roads and driving through fish bearing streams.  On the other hand, ATV riders wanted to see ATV’ing in the forest lands to the West of the settled area recognized as a recreational activity in the OCP.  Non-ATV trail users generally felt ATV use of trails to be incompatible with hiking, horseback riding and mountain biking. 

Water Supply and Pressure

  • A few participants commented that water pressure needs to be improved. 
  • Participants also expressed their concern about the capacity of the water system to accommodate more development and wanted to see Area D explore an alternate water supply.  Many participants felt that development approvals should depend on adequate supply of water.
  • During the round table discussions, participants suggested installation of water metres to encourage conservation, more education and/or enforcement.

Transportation and Roads

The SRD does not have jurisdiction over roads within Area D.  Rural roads are the mandate of the provincial Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.  The following comments will be provided for consideration to the Ministry:

  • Do not develop Darnell or Neigel Road as through roads for high density development          
  • Improve safety at York Road turn-off from Highway                                               
  • Increase speed limit to 100 km/hr before Oyster River bridge
  • Reduce speed limit to 60 km/hr in areas along old highway                                    
  • Fix Henry Road – very bumpy

During the roundtable discussions, participants pointed to the need for street lights at key school bus stops and walking routes for children to and from school.  The narrow shoulders and deep ditches are a concern.  Off road walking routes along unopened Ministry of Transportation rights-of-way were suggested.


  • Participants agreed with the new OCP policies that support the desire for increased frequency and routes for transit for Area D residential areas.

May 2013 Community Visioning Meetings

Using a round table format, the community visioning meetings provided the community an open forum to discuss issues and present ideas. The May 29, 2013 community visioning meeting focused on land use issues of particular interest to the Shelter Point / Stories Beach area and was held at Oyster Bay Resort.

During the first half of the meeting staff reviewed current policies with respect to housing and settlement, provided a synopsis of existing development potential in the area and discussed servicing.  Some of the issues discussed by the public focused on issues more regulatory in nature. During the second half of the meeting, participants split into two groups to allow for focused community visioning regarding a number of OCP subject areas.  Following are highlights of the discussions:


  • Mapping of streams
  • Connections to DFO
  • Considerations to soil contamination (remediation/prevention)

Hazard Lands

  • Wildfire Planning
  • Current Policy Framework – Emergency Plan
  • Coordinate with other levels of government to address hazard lands (drainage/flooding)

Climate Change

  • Awareness & Education
  • Raising property grades
  • Considerations for impacts on properties and neighbouring lands


  • Develop existing Beach Accesses
  • Provide Off Leash Dog Areas
  • Consider the development of an Area ‘D’ Community Hall
  • Consider the provision of an area(s) for cultural events/arts and crafts
  • Dedicate more parks and green spaces through development
  • Support Waterline Trail
  • Secure Pub to Pub Trail


  • Support for variable, commercial agricultural purposes

The May 8, 2013 community visioning meeting focused on land use issues of particular interest to the Oyster River / Oyster Bay area. Following a general introduction to the purpose of the meeting by staff, a number of members of the public requested the opportunity to have a discussion on the Pub to Pub Trail and the issue of dog leashing. Much interest was directed to the retention of this public trail and the ability to continue to walk dogs off leash. Staff was advised of and shown a petition circulated to members of the public requesting that the trail remain open and allow for off leash dog walking.

The first half of the meeting was structured to allow for community visioning on key OCP subject areas. The public divided themselves into groups around three separate tables to partake in discussions.  A brief summary of the discussions follows below:

Sewer and water services

A general review of current policies in the OCP raised a few questions, in particular regarding lot sizes and servicing requirements.  It was noted that there is a policy requiring SRD ownership of sewerage infrastructure as well as a lack of support for a public sewerage outfall for sewer discharge and that these might be in conflict.


Generally positive comments were provided with regard to Transit Services with limited calls for expansion of services at this time.

Oyster River Bank Protection

An extended discussion was had regarding floodplain management and the current limitations to the Oyster River bank protection service that provides protection to many homes in the area.  The current service is under subscribed and the bank protection works and dike will require maintenance in the future.  Some suggestions were provided on how to address this issue, including development of a local service area.


Enforcement of nuisance matters was discussed with a variety of views on what level of nuisance enforcement the community wants to have.  About half the participants wanted things left as they are and the other half expressed a desire to develop stronger enforcement language and capability within Electoral Area D.


  • Identify and support the control of noxious weeds (Scotch Broom, Himalayan Blackberry, and Hogweed)
  • Provide considerations for frogs
  • Promote updates to ecosystem mapping in the area
  • Support the regulation of the foreshore with zoning
  • Consider policy surrounding the use of pesticides and herbicides
  • Support remediation of sensitive areas
  • Provide consideration to upstream impacts (woody debris, siltation, etc.)

Hazard Lands

  • Identify hazard lands within Area D
  • Emergency planning for identified hazard lands
  • Promote stormwater management on private lands

Sea Level Rise

  • Plan for a rise in sea level
  • Increase setbacks from the sea
  • Ensure that policy is in line with provincial regulation

Shoreline Protection

  • Consider community wide foreshore protection
  • Support soft armouring techniques
  • Provide consideration for public access in foreshore protection devices

Parks and Recreation

  • Spend reserves on parks
  • Formalize existing trails and ROW’s
  • Promote the use of parks and vacant lands for community gardens
  • Promote more linear trails
  • Retain existing parks and trails (Pub to Pub Trail)
  • Promote adult park development (bocci)
  • Direct funds to maintenance of parks


  • Promote organic farming/local food production/agri-tourism
  • Need to address water supply issues in south Area D
  • Discussions of the need for an Agriculture Plan for the SRD


  • Forestry needs to be economic
  • OCP policies should be more flexible regarding viability of forest lands
  • Development on the rural fringe will promote affordability


  • A general position that the existing OCP Industrial policies should remain
  • There was also discussion on the 5-Star Aggregates lands and that these lands should be classed as Industrial

2nd Half of Meeting

The second part of the meeting included a staff review of current policies with respect to housing and settlement and a synopsis of existing development potential in the area.  During this discussion a number of members of the public spoke.  Highlights of the public comments are summarized below:

  • Consideration for more Country Residential designated lands
  • Need for more affordable rural lands in Area D
  • Need a land base to attract more families
  • Focus on a range of lot sizes for Area D
  • Promote sustained, controlled, reasonable development
  • Consideration for a community hall in Area D

March 2013  Start Up Meetings

The first phase in the OCP review process included three initial ‘start up’ meetings that were held in separate locations in Area ‘D’ to garner public opinion and generate ideas for further discussion.   

The first meeting of the planning process, held on March 19, 2013 at the Strathcona Park Lodge, focused on land use matters in the Upper Campbell Lake, Strathcona Park and adjacent land areas was attended by 25 members of the public.  Key areas of interest that were brought forward by the public included:

  • Emergency services (Addressing/911/Fire Service)
  • Upland resource activities
  • Forestry activities and implications
  • Water quality concerns
  • Local water service interest
  • Requirements for erosion control measures
  • Public recreation use and impacts of unauthorized recreational land uses
  • Protection of Sphagnum bog natural ecosystem

The second meeting on March 21 focused on land use matters in the Oyster River/Oyster Bay and adjacent land area and took place at Oyster Bay Resort’s Horst Henning Hall.  Approximately 35 members of the public attended this meeting.  Key areas of interest that were brought forward by the public included:

  • Development considerations and future potential
  • Defining a vision for the plan
  • Servicing
  • Trails and greenways
  • Focus on local attractions and features of area
  • Environmental considerations and protection of aquatic values
  • Climate change / sea level rise
  • Bylaw enforcement requirements

The third and final initial start up meeting, which focused on land use matters in the Shelter Point / Stories Beach areas, took place on Thursday, April 25th, 2013 at Ocean Grove School.  Approximately 30 residents of the area attended this meeting.  Key areas of interest that were brought forward by the public included:

  • Provision of hiking and walking trails (land acquisition)
  • Retention of Pub to Pub Trail and off leash opportunities
  • Alternative transportation routes (bypass of Hwy. 19A)
  • Restrictions of minimum parcel sizes to prevent small city sized lots
  • Regulations concerning sensitive ecosystems (streams)
  • Provision of services including water and sewer and associated costs
  • Impacts of small incremental boundary adjustments
  • Drainage issues (neighbour to neighbour and cross boundary)
  • Economics of Area ‘D’ (economic viability)
  • Process required to reduce minimum lot size (amend OCP/Zoning Bylaw)
  • Known or desired growth areas (if any) and identification of such areas
  • Proposed annexation of Area ‘D’, the process and potential impacts on Area ‘D’ residual
  • Forestry lands and potential for secondary manufacturing and associated uses
  • Means of addressing greenhouse gas reduction policies in Area ‘D’
  • OCP review timeline and next steps


top of page

301-990 Cedar Street, Campbell River, BC  V9W 7Z8  phone: 250-830-6700 or 1-877-830-2990  fax: 250-830-6710

Powered by CivicWeb CMS - © Copyright 2013 iCompass Technologies Inc.