Q1) In the Draft Housing By Law there is a termination date clause. What does this mean?

ERIF’s Answer:

• All legal agreements have an end date, but the attainable and affordable rental condos proposed to be built on Lot 2 will belong to a not-for-profit housing provider, ERIF Housing Association, overseen by a housing committee made up of local community members. The intention is that these condos are an asset of attainably priced rental housing for the Ucluelet community in perpetuity.
• 30% of the condos will be bound to being an ‘affordable’ rent rate as defined by the CMHC grant funding for a typical term of 20 years. The other 70% of the condos will be rented on the market at a rate not exceeding the definition of ‘attainable’ based on Ucluelet household incomes.
• All legal agreements have an end clause, and the draft agreement has a nominated date of 2036. The reason for this is to ensure that the rental rate of ‘attainable’ and eligibility for the rentals can be carefully managed by the Not-for-Profit and in over ten-years’ time this may need some revision to respond to the economic conditions and needs of the community.
• The Not-for-Profit Housing Society will remain bound by its purpose in the Constitution under the BC Register which is: “To provide quality, below-market housing which is crucial to the sustained prosperity and growth of a community by supplying, new home construction, home ownership and home rental programs.”
• The Attainable Homeowner condos on Lot 1 will be sold at comparable below-market pricing when construction is completed. Additional clauses will be included in the sale contracts to ensure the owners are eligible, and if they sell the homes within early years of purchase (5 years), the condos remain at comparable below-market pricing.

Q2) What legal mechanisms are in place to ensure the housing commitments made are locked in for this development?

ERIF’s Answer:

• There are several layers of legal assurance that Municipalities use to provide assurance that developers will meet the requirements of approval, and that attainable housing commitments are met. These draft documents are provided in the form of Housing By Laws, Housing Agreements, Covenant Restrictions on the land title and conditions of approval for Environmental, Development and Build Permits. These form binding legal agreements and while typical templates prepared by the DoU have been used, the details of the agreements are being reviewed by DoU solicitors. All documents have been provided in the Public Meeting Agenda for January 21, 2025.
• Commitments to affordable and attainable homes are detailed in Housing Agreements signed by the applicant / landowner. The agreement includes a detailed definition of ‘Attainable’ pricing driven by the definition in the DoU’s Official Community Plan (OCP). These Agreements are then listed as a ‘Covenant Restriction’ on the titles for the land. Covenant Restrictions pass with the land and will bind any future owners, not just the applicant.
• The ownership of the Lot 1 and Lot 2 land will be in a Not-for-Profit Housing Society, ERIF Housing Association. It is bound under BC legislation to serve its defined purpose under the BC Register of Companies which is: “To provide quality, below market housing which is crucial to the sustained prosperity and growth of a community by supplying, new home construction, home ownership and home rental programs”.
• ERIF Housing Association is also bound under the grant conditions with CMHC that 30% of the rentals in Lot 2 will be at the ‘affordable’ fixed rates set by CMHC for the duration of the term of the grant which is typically 20 years.

Q3) Will there be a trail on the shoreline parkland and who will provide this?

ERIF’s Answer:

• Over 35% of the land has been given back to the District, including a 30m setback from the shoreline. The District are now the legal owner of this Parkland and are best placed to weigh the pros and cons of a trail and its format, so the decision rests with them on whether and when to build a trail.
• Council have heard arguments FOR a trail: Access to shore for tourism, guides walkers on where to step to protect the area. Community members also shared concerns AGAINST a trail: Safest to block access to mudflats, unsuitability of walking on mudflats, need for a wildlife corridor, risk to archaeological sites in the parkland. Similarly, some residents raised whether a kayak launch area should be built for community amenity at the end of Minato Rd and this is matter for Council as the owner of the shoreline Park.
• Nonetheless, Council clarified at the Regular Meeting of September 24th, 2024, that they do not want much needed attainable homes being delayed based on the condition that a trail be installed before any homes can be occupied. Council also confirmed that if a trail was to be constructed Council can apply for grant funding for this trail construction under the Resort Municipality Initiative (RMI) grant scheme. This was considered a better funding source than through the developer which would add to the cost of the affordable and attainable homes.
• ERIF’s Masterplan for the site provides for protection of the parkland areas by retaining walls that will prevent occupants directly accessing the mudflats. The Flood Hazard Assessment requires elevation of the homes above the flood level and this will be achieved by elevating the ground level and retaining walls. These retaining walls will provide a natural separation from the building lots to the shoreline – enjoying views of Olsen Bay’s beauty while providing a natural barrier from walking on the fragile Parkland area and the mudflat ecosystem within it. The walls and fences will be in place prior to occupation to protect the Park areas and shoreline.

Q4) What are the environmental features of the site and how will they be protected and preserved?

ERIF’s Answer:

• More than 35% of the site has been preserved as a Parkland area and dedicated back to the District, so the legal title to these lands is with them for perpetuity, including 30m from the shoreline.
• The site has had three separate Environmental Reports in the last 8 years, with Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) site review walking the site in detail and documenting the ecological features to be protected and preserved. It is clear from BC Mapping and the District’s Official Community Plan that there are no wetlands identified on the land, and this has been confirmed in each of these site visits. There are two fish streams (17 and 17B) which are shown in the Official Community Plan and detailed recommendations have been provided for how to protect these, including the mainstream 17 being dedicated as Park land now owned by the District, setbacks and stormwater design giving consideration to natural benching of the creek.
• The existing forest on the site was substantially cleared by a former owner nearly a decade ago and many of the remaining trees incurred damage that has been reviewed by a qualified Arborist noting that danger trees will need to be removed for community safety. While the 30m buffer of trees along Peninsula Road will be reduced to accommodate the attainable and affordable rental homes in Lot 2, this is not a clear cut. The tree buffer required is 10m from the lot boundary, which is approximately 20m from Peninsula Road. Additional information on this buffer can be found in the Q&As following Council’s Regular Meeting on September 24th, 2024, here: https://www.erif.ca/dou-council-qa.php
• The site has been reviewed by a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) following extensive site investigation, walking the site in detail, review of provincial and local environmental mapping and regulations and prepared a 70+ page Environmental Report. This resulted in 40 recommendations to protect the existing fish streams and ecology and regenerate the forest where past damage has been done. Each of these 40 recommendations has been included in the draft Environmental Development Permit prepared by the DoU and attached to the Public Meeting Agenda.
• The Environmental Development Permit provides conditions that need to be followed through the construction process including ongoing involvement and checks by the Qualified Environmental Professional.

Q5) How will traffic be managed around Minato Rd and Peninsula Rd?

ERIF’s Answer:

• Detailed road and traffic assessment reports have been prepared and are published for the public to access which set out detailed modelling of projected residents, cars and trips. Based on these studies the report recommends carefully design best practice access roads to ensure traffic is safe and sustainable through each phase of the development. Access is designed from Minato Rd in accordance with the directions of the B.C. Ministry of Transport (MoT). This road will be upgraded to District standard design.
• A secondary access to Peninsula Rd has been designed, but at this stage is only supported by the B.C. MoT Engineers for emergency use. It will be available for future use if and when the District applies to the MoT for a speed reduction on Peninsula Rd and a second access road is supported by the MoT.
• The roads within the property are private roads, and their suitability for emergency access including flood evacuation have been reviewed in detail by the Fire Chief of Ucluelet to ensure complete compliance with the DoU’s published policy on emergency road design.
• The design also works to link the homes with access to the excellent bike paths in place for green transport.

Q7) What flood measures will be taken to ensure risk is mitigated and managed?

ERIF’s Answer:

• 221 Minato Rd applications have exceeded typical investigation and design for flood and tsunami. In addition to mapping by Ebbwater Engineering who prepared the District’s area flood maps, ERIF has had the highest qualified Coastal and Hydraulic Engineers in BC at Kerr Wood Liedel undertake detailed modelling of tsunami and projected sea rises for the next centuries to determine a safe level for construction, that the homes will be elevated above.
• Detailed work has been done to ensure compliance with Provincial flood and tsunami regulations, with the firm preparing the report contributing to the development of these Provincial Guidelines. The flood engineering modelling and design is of such a high standard that the development has been issued a ‘Flood Assurance Statement’ which assures Council and homeowners that engineers certify the safety mitigation measures as a safe and appropriate development for the site.
• The detailed reports have been included in the Public Meeting Agenda.
• The Structural Mitigation measures have been developed based on international best practice for flood and tsunami management. Buildings on Lots 1, 2, 4 and 5 will be elevated above the flood level by retaining walls and building up the ground level above the flood levels.
• The waterfront homes of Lot 3 incorporate world leading architectural design to keep habitable levels above the flood level. In addition to this, non-structural mitigation measures include evacuation routes within walking distance, early warning systems, on-site emergency wardens with additional training, community safety sessions and evacuation drills for residents. ERIF has worked closely with Ucluelet’s Fire Chief and emergency personnel to ensure road design is optimized for safe evacuation and there is capacity to assist residents in the event of emergency.