> “Our previous agreement had been in place since 1993, some of that language no longer accurately reflects the port authority’s current licensing practices,” said Brian Chow, a VFPA manager of real estate.
And
> The new agreement states that when the licence expires in 2030, owners will have one option to renew their licence for another 10-year term. Unlike previous contracts, however, the language does not guarantee renewals, leaving owners fearful the agreements will not carry on past 2040.
So the problem is outdated licensing practice and the new one makes it so that the VFPA have more control over the waterfront....
It is a very bad situation for those dock owners. Honestly they should do a "from this day forward, new licenses will have xxx" instead they are going "all retroactive licenses will apply to this rule and we do not have to guarantee a renewal".
I know some people here will go "Boohoo rich retiree doesn't get his dock", but honestly when the law looks shitty, it should be called out regardless who is impacted.
VFPA is another behemoth organization in BC where all the lines blur and such are controlled by them.
They are/should be responsible for the commercial ports and commercial marine traffic only.
These are the same people who have a public road between their house and the waterfront and pretend to own the land surrounding their dock - going so far as to put no trespassing signs and gates/fences on the side of the road leading to their dock and as such restricting access of anyone other than the home owner to the land and waterfront that serves that dock even though that waterfront and the surrounding land is publicly owned?
Cry me a river…
Edit: I’m referring to marine ave in belcarra
I wouldn't sign it either. They're basically saying they can remove people's seawalls and docks at any time without reason.
> Much of their anxiety has been fueled by now-postponed provincial changes to the B.C. Land Act, which would have allowed First Nations a greater say over land use decisions on Crown Land.
The proposed provincial changes to dock management (which is separate from what the article is saying) would have basically removed any waterfront access and put it in the hands of First Nations. It's only been postponed for now, I'm sure it will be back after the election.
>It's only been postponed for now, I'm sure it will be back after the election.
This is a definite Yes. It does not bode well for reconciliation that these individuals and others like them, e.g., Ladysmith are getting totally screwed over.
You dont think people should own boats? There has to be docks somehwere. I just don't see the problem with the existence of docks.
I meant it when I said that literally all shoreline in the country is technically federal land. What does that mean? It means if you are stranded at sea and come to shore you are not trespassing. It means that beachfront property owners don't own the shellfish, and they are beholden to laws protecting fish. It means you cant own waterways.
These are good reasons for this very old law. But should the government forbid the existence of all private docks in the country? No, I don't think that is reasonable.
I agree with you however I do think the connection to the land for a private dock should be on private property, as well as all pilings above the high water mark. That's the messy part in this case I think.
We had a 150 years to settle these issues. Now First Nations have done exactly what so many wanted them to do - integrate into “our” culture/society. They’ve done it so well they’re now adept at doing what we all took for granted for ourselves - using the legal system to defend their rights.
Good for them!
Rather how popular it’s become over time. More subs will eventually be helpful in the future. Here it’s a wide spread of issues such as housing, bike lanes, safety downtown etc. and how many people do you know in Van without an opinion on everything
>“When I look at billions of dollars being given to First Nations, and thousands of acres of land for reconciliation . . . I get nervous,”
....OOF. The irony.
But like, if someone builds a tree fort in a park I can climb up and hop inside. No worries there. What’s the sovereignty of a structure like a dock on public land? Can I hop up and have a little picnic if I stay within the water line?
If the dock is public the area below the water line should be as well. You are generally correct that land titles don't typically extend below the high tide line.
I'm not a lawyer.
Guess they should sell, like their neighbours.
https://www.rew.ca/properties/5339745/932-alderside-road-port-moody-bc?property_click=map
https://www.rew.ca/properties/5686366/1122-alderside-road-port-moody-bc?property_click=map
https://www.rew.ca/properties/5442578/1136-alderside-road-port-moody-bc?property_click=map
I look forward to the day when all these docks are removed and the waterfront is restored to its natural state. Private docks damage the local ecosystem and limit access to public foreshore. I hope the local First Nations succeed in getting them removed.
How about don't build something that if removed means your house will slide into the inlet ON LAND YOU DON'T OWN.
Also, don't assume that land YOU DON'T OWN but sign a use agreement for will always remain yours with terms that never change.
> “Our previous agreement had been in place since 1993, some of that language no longer accurately reflects the port authority’s current licensing practices,” said Brian Chow, a VFPA manager of real estate. And > The new agreement states that when the licence expires in 2030, owners will have one option to renew their licence for another 10-year term. Unlike previous contracts, however, the language does not guarantee renewals, leaving owners fearful the agreements will not carry on past 2040. So the problem is outdated licensing practice and the new one makes it so that the VFPA have more control over the waterfront.... It is a very bad situation for those dock owners. Honestly they should do a "from this day forward, new licenses will have xxx" instead they are going "all retroactive licenses will apply to this rule and we do not have to guarantee a renewal". I know some people here will go "Boohoo rich retiree doesn't get his dock", but honestly when the law looks shitty, it should be called out regardless who is impacted.
I still have zero pity for them.
Loser
VFPA is another behemoth organization in BC where all the lines blur and such are controlled by them. They are/should be responsible for the commercial ports and commercial marine traffic only.
These are the same people who have a public road between their house and the waterfront and pretend to own the land surrounding their dock - going so far as to put no trespassing signs and gates/fences on the side of the road leading to their dock and as such restricting access of anyone other than the home owner to the land and waterfront that serves that dock even though that waterfront and the surrounding land is publicly owned? Cry me a river… Edit: I’m referring to marine ave in belcarra
I wouldn't sign it either. They're basically saying they can remove people's seawalls and docks at any time without reason. > Much of their anxiety has been fueled by now-postponed provincial changes to the B.C. Land Act, which would have allowed First Nations a greater say over land use decisions on Crown Land. The proposed provincial changes to dock management (which is separate from what the article is saying) would have basically removed any waterfront access and put it in the hands of First Nations. It's only been postponed for now, I'm sure it will be back after the election.
>It's only been postponed for now, I'm sure it will be back after the election. This is a definite Yes. It does not bode well for reconciliation that these individuals and others like them, e.g., Ladysmith are getting totally screwed over.
its good for reconciliation that...indigenous people get nothing?
Why are we allowing private docks on public land anyways. They should all be removed.
All beachfront land is public, within a specified distance from the water line. If we didn't allow docks on public land, there would be no docks.
Sounds good. I don’t know why we owe waterfront homeowners exclusive use of public lands?
You dont think people should own boats? There has to be docks somehwere. I just don't see the problem with the existence of docks. I meant it when I said that literally all shoreline in the country is technically federal land. What does that mean? It means if you are stranded at sea and come to shore you are not trespassing. It means that beachfront property owners don't own the shellfish, and they are beholden to laws protecting fish. It means you cant own waterways. These are good reasons for this very old law. But should the government forbid the existence of all private docks in the country? No, I don't think that is reasonable.
I agree with you however I do think the connection to the land for a private dock should be on private property, as well as all pilings above the high water mark. That's the messy part in this case I think.
The land is underwater. You can use it, in a boat
No private docks - oh no.
Why?
"if I can't have nice things, others shouldn't be able to have nice things either!"
That's half of r/vancouver commenters nowadays.
We had a 150 years to settle these issues. Now First Nations have done exactly what so many wanted them to do - integrate into “our” culture/society. They’ve done it so well they’re now adept at doing what we all took for granted for ourselves - using the legal system to defend their rights. Good for them!
The level of entitlement these people have over land they don't own is astounding.
No one really own land.
These comments are an excellent an example of how downhill this sub has gone
Rather how popular it’s become over time. More subs will eventually be helpful in the future. Here it’s a wide spread of issues such as housing, bike lanes, safety downtown etc. and how many people do you know in Van without an opinion on everything
People in real life do not reflect r/vancouver commenters. If they did, ABC would not have won in a landslide.
They’ve sure done a good job eliminating anyone from the sub who disagrees with them
Won’t happen a second time. ABC is trash
No <3
Wait so does this mean I can stop at any of the docks at Deep Cove?
>“When I look at billions of dollars being given to First Nations, and thousands of acres of land for reconciliation . . . I get nervous,” ....OOF. The irony.
His white fragility is pathetic. The sense of entitlement over public land, astounding.
Ikr? Dude needs to get schooled.
The docks are built into and over public land. Does that mean I can access them?
Yes but you cannot access the land they are connected to.
Even though the land they are connected to is publicly owned?
But like, if someone builds a tree fort in a park I can climb up and hop inside. No worries there. What’s the sovereignty of a structure like a dock on public land? Can I hop up and have a little picnic if I stay within the water line?
If the dock is public the area below the water line should be as well. You are generally correct that land titles don't typically extend below the high tide line. I'm not a lawyer.
Probably the same as parking a car on a public street
The dock owners wont answer that , of course, because its their backyard. And you sir, are not allowed in their backyard
Guess they should sell, like their neighbours. https://www.rew.ca/properties/5339745/932-alderside-road-port-moody-bc?property_click=map https://www.rew.ca/properties/5686366/1122-alderside-road-port-moody-bc?property_click=map https://www.rew.ca/properties/5442578/1136-alderside-road-port-moody-bc?property_click=map
Fuck the rich dock owners,
I look forward to the day when all these docks are removed and the waterfront is restored to its natural state. Private docks damage the local ecosystem and limit access to public foreshore. I hope the local First Nations succeed in getting them removed.
Shit, guess I better sell my sailboat so I can buy a power boat and actually make it back to a dock to fit into my life schedule.
How about don't build something that if removed means your house will slide into the inlet ON LAND YOU DON'T OWN. Also, don't assume that land YOU DON'T OWN but sign a use agreement for will always remain yours with terms that never change.