Colwood Creek's spray and play park is at risk of removal or relocation because of an oversight by the city.
The 12 hectare park – the largest developed park in Colwood – is designated as Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), a provincial land-use zone where farming is the priority use.
While the ALR permits use of the land for “passive recreation,” it does not allow the construction of amenities exceeding a footprint of 100 square-metres.
When asked by Mayor Doug Kobayashi at the May 26 meeting if the spray park is “legal,” staff used body language to give their answer.
“By the look on your face you’ve answered my question,” he said to Yazmin Hernandez, director of planning. “We’re at risk here then, shoot. Thank god someone picked up on this right now.”
Confirming Kobayashi's fear, later in the meeting chief administrative officer (CAO) Jason Johnson, said the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) has told the city the "intensification of the park goes beyond what’s allowed and permissible under the ALR."
The ALR restrictions were discovered while planning was underway to enhance the park as part of the city’s 2025-2029 Capital Plan, with nearly $2 million earmarked for the project.
Plans include a picnic shelter, dog park, a washroom facility, plus a playground and spray park upgrade.
All prohibited while the park is designated as ALR.
The news has come as a surprise to Kobayashi, who said he did not know the Colwood Creek plans had been “cancelled.”
“How did we not know it was ALR?” he said.
According to the director of planning, the city was aware the park fell under ALR regulations, however, they “understood ‘park uses’ to be an exemption.”
But following discussions with the ALC, the city has learned “passive park uses are okay, but not recreational and more involved park uses,” explained Hernandez.
As a solution, staff recommended the city submit an application to the ALC to have Colwood Creek Park excluded from the ALR.
However, not all councillors were keen for the park to lose the protection ALR offers.
Coun. Misty Olsen warned it would leave the park “vulnerable to development in the future.”
For Olsen, a non-farm use application would be preferable. Which, if approved, would allow the city to seek specific approval for proposed park improvements and amenities that are otherwise restricted under ALR regulations.
But approval of non-farm use for the park does not guarantee the city can then move forward with its enhancement plans for Colwood Creek, warned Coun. Ian Ward, who said the move could "effectively wipe (the park) off the map."
“And now we’ve got giant empty fields because you guys wanted to stand up and say let’s preserve farmland for the future," he said. "If that’s a hill you want to die on, that’s great, but explain to the public what happens when those amenities disappear."
At the meeting, the majority of councillors agreed to refer the issue back to staff, requesting more information.
Johnson explained staff will contact the ALC “to determine what other applications are possible outside of an exclusion application, to allow this non-farm intensification of the park.”
