A Gibsons developer must pay a fine of $1,000 for cutting trees near Charman Creek.
In Sechelt provincial court June 30, Barrie Bolton defended his numbered company against four charges of municipal bylaw infractions dating back to early 2004. Bolton argued that the bylaw charges brought by the Town of Gibsons were politically motivated and said the town's planning director had given him verbal permission to clear-cut his property.
But Judge Doug Moss was not convinced by those arguments and found Bolton's company guilty of two charges of violating the town's bylaws by cutting trees too close to a ravine in a development permit area.
"Bolton maintained he didn't know he needed a development permit to cut trees," said Moss. "People who buy, sell and develop property either know or should know the law with respect to development permits."
Barry Janyk, Mayor of Gibsons, said the case shows the town has rules and intends to enforce them.
"We're a town that respects the natural world around us," said Janyk after Bolton's conviction. "There are no winners in a court case, but in this case I think the community is the real beneficiary."
Bolton called as a witness Tony Rowley, formerly the Crown prosecutor for the Sechelt court. Rowley, who had owned the property next to Bolton's for 15 years, said that in 2003 he and Bolton met with Chris Marshall, the town's planning director. Rowley testified that Marshall told them there was no municipal tree-cutting bylaw and "if we were of that bent we could probably log our place."
Rowley took Marshall's comments to mean this might be his last chance to log the property before a tree-cutting bylaw came in.
After that meeting, Rowley said, he considered clearing the trees on his property, but instead sold the land to Bolton. In February and March of 2004, Bolton cleared trees on both properties, including the development permit areas, right to the top of the ravine. He did not apply for a development permit until after the trees had been cut and the town had sent him a "cease and desist" order.
Under questioning from the judge, Rowley said he didn't know what a development permit area was and he "didn't see any practical reason" for having a geotechnical hazard zone on part of his property. He said he was not an expert on municipal law. "The intentions of the town changed over the years," said Rowley. "They were doing what they could to ensure I couldn't do anything with my land."
The judge rejected Bolton and Rowley's testimony that Marshall had given them verbal permission to log the entire property. He said it was "troubling that a senior lawyer [Rowley] and an educator [Bolton, who is a retired teacher and principal] would take a bit of an off-hand comment" as permission to log, rather than informing themselves about the law.
Bill Beamish, administrator for the town of Gibsons, prosecuted the case. He said the development permit area and geotechnical hazard zone along the ravine are intended to prevent situations such as the one in North Vancouver last year, where development on steep slopes led to landslides. Tree cutting is banned within 15 metres of the top of a ravine unless a development permit is issued, which would require a geotechnical report showing the trees could be cut safely.
"If we were to ignore an offence of this nature and after a heavy rainfall a portion of Bolton's property were to collapse into the ravine, we would soon be hearing from his lawyers," said Beamish.
Another town employee sent Bolton a letter in 1997 explaining the geotechnical hazard area, development permit area and 15-metre setback from the top of the ravine, but Bolton said he threw that letter away.
Beamish had asked for the maximum penalty of $2,000 for each charge, but Moss said the maximum penalty should be reserved for the "worst of the worst" offenders and fined Bolton $500 for each charge.
Under the current law, the maximum penalty for a similar bylaw offence would be $10,000.
