Icy Waters’ proposed lots under scrutiny

Mayor Bev Buckway is waiting to see the regular water reports from the Icy Waters Ltd. site on Fish Lake Road before deciding who's got their facts right and wrong after Monday night's public hearing on the proposal for country residential lots off Fish Lake Road.

Mayor Bev Buckway is waiting to see the regular water reports from the Icy Waters Ltd. site on Fish Lake Road before deciding who’s got their facts right and wrong after Monday night’s public hearing on the proposal for country residential lots off Fish Lake Road.

One member of the public, Dorothy Bradley, argued Icy Waters (which is proposing the development) is releasing more than the allowable limit of phosphates into the water system.

Icy Waters’ Jonathan Lucas argued the fish farm hasn’t broached its phosphate levels outlined in its water use licence.

“That’s a really good example of why we go through the process that we do; where we have a first reading, we have a public input opportunity or public hearing and then we do second and third reading at a later time,“ Buckway said in an interview following Monday’s meeting.

The process gives city staff an opportunity to clarify conflicting information when it brings forward the report on the public hearing before council votes on second and third readings, she said.

“That’s the job of administration now; to determine if these reports are accurate.“

Bradley argued against the proposed change in the city’s Official Community Plan (OCP) that would see the site designation of the 11 hectares proposed for six lots change from natural open space to residential-country.

Before bringing up the phosphate issue, Bradley noted the city prides itself on being a “wilderness city”.

“I am proud of this claim,“ she said, noting members Porter Creek Community Association, Takhini Community Association and Friends of McIntyre Creek, which she recently started, are pleased to live in a city with clean air and nearly clean water.

She then argued Icy Waters is putting more phosphates in the water system than it is permitted, a claim Lucas would refute.

When Bradley began commenting on the impact of phosphates in the water system, she was interrupted by Buckway, who asked her to speak directly to the OCP amendment being proposed.

After the meeting, the mayor noted public hearings permit five minutes for residents to speak directly to the proposal, and when she couldn’t see where the argument was going, she opted to question the speaker on it.

Bradley went on to comment that with new homes being built in the area, more phosphates would leach from lawns into the water, thereby impacting the wildlife along McIntyre Creek and in Porter Creek.

“We’re going to to lose our fish,“ she warned, arguing that would in turn mean a loss of bird species in the area and so on.

Lucas, meanwhile, insisted the fish farm has not breached its water licence. There has been extensive sampling with results compiled in annual reports, he noted.

There was one day where heavy rains resulted in a heavy sediment in McIntyre Marsh, leaving the phosphorus levels higher than usual, but that was due to a naturally occurring event, he stressed.

“It’s a very complicated picture,“ he said.

After defending Icy Waters’ discharge levels, he went on to argue in favour of the development, noting the demand as demonstrated in new subdivisions such as Whitehorse Copper and Ravens Ridge.

The area would be in bicycling distance of the downtown core and there wouldn’t be any major new road ways to be developed with the site sitting off the already-maintained Fish Lake Road.

“We’re acutely aware of the conservation (argument),“ he said, noting the most heavily-used wildlife area now is the Icy Waters site, which shows the human activity in the area hasn’t significantly impacted wildlife there.

While Lucas presented the argument for the development, Porter Creek resident Carole Bookless used the same arguments to try to persuade council to oppose the OCP amendment.

The close proximity to Ravens Ridge, she argued, makes for a very narrow wildlife path between the two areas.

The fencing needed to keep bears away from the site now does not bode well for the new homes either, she said.

“This proponent has not been a good neighbour to Porter Creek,“ Bookless continued.

She encouraged council to go have a look at the Icy Waters site, which she described as an “eyesore”.

Like Bradley, Bookless pointed to phosphates altering water chemistry and having a negative impact on Porter Creek. Icy Waters is also up for water board hearings on its licence in December, she said.

She noted that already, Ear Lake has been drawn down, Hidden Lake destroyed and so on due to developments.

Another resident, Cameron Eckert, took issue with the process.

While the city seems to be carefully planning the Whistle Bend development in Porter Creek’s lower bench, including public consultation during week-long planning sessions, Eckert said, this seems completely spontaneous.

“There are costs and there are risks,“ he said, arguing scattering homes in the bush only increases the risk of forest fires.

He questioned who would pay for fire abatement in the area once houses are built there.

Eckert also took issue with Lucas’ argument that the Fish Lake Road is in the right condition for the new development.

“I don’t think the road is fine at all,“ he said, pointing to the dangerous intersection where Fish Lake Road meets the Alaska Highway.

The road is not a safe place for families to be out with their children, he said.

Eckert also questioned how a site like Icy Waters could go from public land over to private land and now into residential development.

Buckway commented after his presentation that any property owner has the right to come forward with a proposed development to go through the outlined process that council can then either approve or turn down.

“If administration refuses to let them come to council, that’s not a public process,“ she said.

“By allowing it to come forward to council does not mean that council and administration is totally supporting it. We are just following the public process laid out through the Municipal Act that we are bound to follow.“

Although those opposed to the development may have been more vocal, it appears the proposal has support, with 26 letters being submitted to the city favouring it. Another two letters in opposition also came in to the city.

A report on the public hearing will come to council at its next standing committee meeting in August.