Skip to content

Beach wall owners threatened with legal action

The Islands Trust has told property owners who built a contentious stone beach wall on Keats Island in February to remove or legalize the structure by August or face legal action.

The Islands Trust has told property owners who built a contentious stone beach wall on Keats Island in February to remove or legalize the structure by August or face legal action.

"The illegal construction of shoreline walls is a growing concern on the islands, and the bylaws are in place for good reasons," said Linda Adams, chief administrative officer for the Islands Trust, which plans land use and regulates development for islands between the British Columbia mainland and the southern tip of Vancouver Island.

The wall, located at Maple Beach in the island's Eastbourne community, is a riprap stone revetment which property owners Ken and Joan Pedersen say they built to combat erosion.

"Waterfront property owners sometimes decide to build a wall along the shoreline to protect their property from erosion, but they can do a lot of damage if they do it the wrong way," Adams said. "Poorly-designed seawalls not only damage fish habitat, public beach areas and archaeological sites, they interrupt natural shoreline processes."

Adams said if the wall isn't taken down or "legalized" through an Islands Trust development variance permit by August, the Gambier Island Local Trust Committee -which oversees Keats and enforces its bylaws - will seek a court injunction to have the structure removed. Last week, the Islands Trust Executive Committee agreed to pick up the legal costs.

Adams said the Pedersens provided a land survey which shows the structure "encroaches on Crown foreshore," though she said it's unclear to what extent. But Adams said even if it the structure were entirely on private property, the Islands Trust would still consider it illegal.

"If it's on the Crown land then no structures are permitted, and if it's on [the Pedersens'] property, no structures are permitted that close to the natural [ocean] boundary," she said.

In April, a crowd of approximately 100 Keats residents and friends gathered by the revetment to discuss and protest the structure.

"We've heard from many Keats islanders expressing great concern about the construction of this rock wall on one of the most significant public beaches on Keats Island," said Islands Trust bylaw enforcement officer Miles Drew.

Ken Pedersen said he was blind-sided by the move by Islands Trust, which included issuing a press release to various media outlets on Tuesday.

"We're surprised by Islands Trust's actions given that to this date we're still waiting to receive information that they had promised to supply to us regarding variance options to meet their needs," he said.

Besides Islands Trust, branches of the federal and provincial governments are also investigating the structure.

"[Fisheries and Oceans Canada] is actively investigating recent works at Maple Beach and we're not in a position to discuss anything associated with that investigation," said department fisheries biologist Bruce Clark.

The provincial Ministry of Tourism, Culture and the Arts, which includes the Archaeology Branch, would not offer comment until a pending archaeological impact assessment can be completed on the site. The Ministry said an application for a permit to allow the assessment is still under review.

Chief Ian Campbell of the Squamish Nation, which counts Keats as part of its traditional territory, has repeatedly spoken out against the structure, which he said impacts a Squamish Nation archaeological site.

"I think anytime that someone alters a site, I think that's very disheartening to all citizens of British Columbia that it forever destroys any of our heritage and culture," he said.

Pedersen emphasized that he and his wife went to great lengths to get government sign-offs on the revetment project before building it in February.

"Eleven years of our due diligence and testing with all possible agencies that might be involved in such a project and finding out what meets their criteria has led us to our conclusion that we've not done anything wrong," Pedersen said.