Editor:
Re: “SCRD rejects moratorium on new development,” Aug. 20.
The issue of insufficient water supply for existing residents and to accommodate growth is not new. With the possibility of “running out of water” for Chapman Creek users by mid to late September, we are at a point where the SCRD was in the early 1980s. In June 1982, it was necessary to cut off water for two to three hours each evening along Highway 101 from the cemetery to Gibsons, and fire protection was minimal to non-existent from 8 a.m. to 2 a.m.
Consequently, the regional district imposed a moratorium on future subdivisions in that area until the water supply could be improved. The moratorium was lifted in March 1984 once financing was assured for the necessary infrastructure improvements.
The Ministry of Transportation and Highways, the approving authority at that time for subdivisions in the SCRD, considered the moratorium to be in the public interest and honoured it. There were no legal challenges as the moratorium did not apply to applications in progress where costs of development may have occurred.
If the SCRD is worried about possible legal challenges, they may want to consider the legal liability of not providing fire protection to water users if they run out of water.
On a longer term basis, water demand from growth needs to be matched realistically with the ability to supply water. Local governments have the ability to do this as rezoning to land uses that require higher water demand is discretionary.
Judy Skogstad, Sechelt
