Saturday, September 6, 2014

Submission to MoTI re: Kalamalka Lake Park road project

My submission to MoTI regarding the "boundary adjustment" of Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park.



Anonymous said...

Good points Gyula!

Anonymous said...

Hi Gyula:
I appreciate everyones right to an opinion and a vote.

Based on minutes from a meeting with Parks MOTI and others I can say this process started in 2000 when MOTI took over Cosens Bay Road responsibilities from The District of Coldstream when they adjusted their boundaries to no longer include the park portion of Cosens Bay road. In those minutes MOTI discussed the minimum width and road requirements for a road of that traffic volume and to have a maintenance contractor maintain the road. This meeting was with Parks and other stakeholders. An environmental study was done to find out if there was a better location for the road. The study concluded the road was best to stay in its current location. Traffic reports at the time and in 2010 show significant increase in traffic on the road with little increase in property owners. The traffic increase is from park users and is also one reason the cougar canyon parking lot needed to be enlarged.
R6 zoning does not limited road access to the public and I have seen increased usage of the cougar canyon parking lot year round. R6 zoning also does not limit an owner from using their yard or checking on their property. I have also offered to send you a property subdividing plan that clearly states The District of Coldstream zoned those properties as R1.
But irrelevant of that, You forgot to mention there are 4 large holdings out there that can live year round.

As for social and economic benefit. The park is used by visitors and people year round. There is a tremendous benefit to people when they use the park. I think that is one of the reasons we have parks.

As for economic, can you imagine the law suit, that ultimately tax payers foot the bill for on a law suit where someone dies or is injured on a road that does not even meet the minimum standards of MOTI nor does it meet Parks guidelines for a road that are designed to protect the park and the people that use the park.
Taking 14 years to get MOTI to proceed with the first step of paperwork required for them to maintain a minimum standard of road is not what I would call fast.
The reality is traffic and Park usage are increasing and with it so is the risk to tax payers that far out ways other risks. As a government official you should understand liability. An awareness that a road does not even meet the minimum requirements and a decision not to do anything about it is a huge liability. Probably the same reason The District of Coldstream choose to do a boundary adjustment but unfortunately for MOTI they do not have that option.

Coldstreamer said...

"But irrelevant of that, You forgot to mention there are 4 large holdings out there that can live year round."

True! But would it not be lovely if those lots could get services and develop into huge subdivisions? I wonder who would provide the services for those subdivisions?

"As for social and economic benefit. The park is used by visitors and people year round. There is a tremendous benefit to people when they use the park. I think that is one of the reasons we have parks."

Let me know when you get your first cheque as your share of the great economic benefit.

As for death due to traffic accident. There are huge traffic accidents on highly maintained highways. Much of that is due to increased speed. You have significantly less damage from a traffic accident at 30 km speed limit than at 120 km. Just check out the statistics from the last two weeks.

The DOC chose to request boundary realignment because of the Mayor of the time had already been approached with requests to amalgamate the cabin colony into Coldstream. That would have been a huge drain on the valets of the taxpayers of Coldstream. That id why Coldstream opted for the boundary adjustment.

Anonymous said...

For the record:
Gyula I do not have any large holdings that I can profit from and personally would prefer not to have any more development. I stand to profit by a big fat zero dollars. I just believe the laws should be followed including speed limits that will remain as 30 km. At 30 km per hour the road requires specific sight lines for corners etc and it currently does not meet those.

The tax base is very high for properties out there.

2010 taxes collected were 275,000 dollars. very high for only 90 to 100 properties. Just to be clear I do believe that was the correct decision for the DOC.

Anonymous said...

Gyula, I am pleased you are taking the stand you are and that you made your feelings known to MOT. Your points are valid. Please stick to your guns.

Unknown said...

Dear " Hiding in the bushes",

Very detailed and verbose as usual.
However some " clever lad" drove over an embankment on Cosens Bay Road on Sunday in broad daylight and good weather conditions.... and then tried to flee the scene with a stick impaled in his neck.

RCMP reports:" Charges are being considered for driving under suspension."

I guess this is one of the instances where it is the fault of the road, again, just like having a head-on crash.
To repeat: causes of mishaps on roads (any road) 90% driver caused, 5% vehicle caused (both the driver's responsibility) and 5% road caused.

Hans-Joerg Mueller

Unknown said...

For yet more info on this road proposal as submitted by MoTI to MoEnvironment please check out

My comment:

Please read it carefully, it puts the lie to most everything that has been proclaimed by the real pushers behind this project namely Mrs Alice Klim and Company. For instance: Quote "A public right of way separate from the park would provide MoTI the ability to carry out maintenance to address concerns of the park users and land owners beyond the Park without encumbrance by the Park Act." End Quote

Ah and Mrs. Klim goes on TV claiming MoTI already has a RoW no need to apply for a RoW.
Very interesting.

Hans-Joerg Mueller

Anonymous said...

Dear Hans:

I completely agree with you on the driver and it being his fault. That being said both Parks guidelines for roads and MOTI standards require a rail around that corner. If there was one there the park would not have this idiots truck with oil, gas and other fluids possible leaking into the park. If we were to idiot proof the world none of us would be driving cars. How he survived is beyond me.
I do not question God's plan.

Hiding in the Bushes.

Anonymous said...

Give me a break bushes. Ever driven to Adventure Bay or West Road? How about the drop to the town house on the old Mori Nursery site below Kal Lake Rd.

Disgusting opportunism!

Anonymous said...


God @TheTweetOfGod · Aug 21
"Doctor Who Survived Ebola: 'God Saved My Life'." Yep. And I killed the hundreds of Africans who died of it, because screw them.

Anonymous said...

Bushes- West Side Road

Anonymous said...

I did not write the Parks Guidelines for Roads. Parks did.
Yes Westside road is bad and if I was driving it all the time I would be working to make it safer but at least it meets the Minimum standards that MOTI has for roads. Cosens Bay road does not.
Sorry I was just attempting to agree with Hans and say I have no idea how he survived.

Hiding in the Bushes.

Anonymous said...


You mentioned the signage that MOTI added two years ago to identify corners and use caution. Parks initially said no to those when we requested them. We pushed highways because there are other signs identifying paths etc and Parks eventually allowed them to be put up.
Just a bit of history on those.

Hiding in the bushes.

Unknown said...

Dear "Hiding behind the bushes"

It may be a surprise to you, but road signs get usually erected to protect the stupid from their own stupidity - not that it helps any as evidenced on Sunday 2014/09/07 - and to advise the general public what they can expect along any stretch of road.
In essence Rule One is "Adjust your driving to the road conditions" and that applies in any weather at any time of the year.
Basically MoTI agreed, and finally Parks did too, that given the road conditions people didn't adjust their driving.
Naturally that wouldn't apply to the Cabin Owners since they knew before the bought/built what the road was like and they always act according to Rule One. (where is my tongue in cheek smiley when I really need it!).
Anyone who expects that people's driving habits will improve if the road is upgraded has illusions. The speeds will increase, even less attention will be paid and that will be it.

BTW in the rail-fanning community we have an expression that is used when some other yahoo gets killed by a train: "just a minor clean-up of the gene pool". Very harsh, but true!

Hans-Joerg Mueller

Anonymous said...

Hans 6:46

I agree with you completely. But it is often the innocent that get hurt by the "stupid" as you put it. My Grandfather always used to say "watch out for the other guy". Right now there is not even a complete lane of your own for a driver to stay in. The current corners do not even meet the sight lines for the speed of 30 km an hour. This is the only road in BC that two branches of the government claim administration of. Parks does not build the road to their Guidelines and when you ask them a question about the road they refer to MOTI. When you want MOTI to build it to their minimum standard they say they can not as Parks will not allow it. This political loop has to end and it needs to be build properly. This idiot could have run someone else off the road. And yes there will probably be more to come but there are reasons roads have minimum requirements. I believe that is to give the rest of us a fighting chance. There should be one complete lane going in each direction to give drivers a chance.


Coldstreamer said...

Dear Bushes.

My heart really bleeds for you!

However, when I first arrived in these parts in 1976 I had a lady employee whose family owned a piece of property at Cosens Bay. They had a key for the gate from the Ranch and had to go through a locked gate to access their property. There was really no road but a rugged trail which probably did not allow 30 km speed but they were apparently satisfied as these properties were used as summer retreats (hence the R6 zoning).

Now you have a significantly improved road to the detriment of the park's environment and you want to have more and more and more! Where will you buy your next wilderness summer retreat?

Anonymous said...

As the courts have determined the road was public since the turn of the 1900's. Just because the DOC did not administer to things correctly in the past and the Ranch illegally denied owners access to their property is no reason that one should continue to be denied their legal rights.

I will be there for you one day when your rights are denied.

Unknown said...

Dear "Hiding in the bushes"

"I will be there for you one day when your rights are denied."

I hope you are very good at following instructions.
Should I ever need a lawyer, for whatever reason, I will have a very solid set of instructions for him; it's the least a client can do to get some real results.
BTW I read somewhere at one time that lawyers really dislike well informed clients. Is that true?

Hans-Joerg Mueller

On another note; since you supposedly signed a non-disclosure agreement regarding your identity, did you have to sign away any other rights? ;) :) Or would you just be in an obvious conflict of interest in your capacity as Cabin Owner?

Coldstream Ratepayers News! All Coldstream residents are ratepayers!

The opinions expressed by "Coldstreamer" are strictly his own and do not represent the opinions of Coldstream Council!

Because I value your thoughtful opinions, I encourage you to add a comment to this discussion. Don't be offended if I edit your comments for clarity or to keep out questionable matters, however, and I may even delete off-topic comments.

Gyula Kiss;


We must protect our rights and freedom! (Photo courtesy of D. Gibson) Click on eagle to watch EAGLECAMS

About Me

My photo
I have been a resident of Coldstream since 1976. I have had 15 years of experience on Council, 3 years as Mayor. As a current Councillor I am working to achieve fair water and sewer rates and to ensure that taxpayers get fair treatment. The current direction regarding water supply is unsustainable and I am doing all I can to get the most cost effective water supply possible.