loading...
Update: 10/01/19 4:30 p.m.
By John McDonald
Residents of Curtis Road and UBCO, currently involved in a legal wrangle over access and use of a private road behind the university, could find a solution in the City of Kelowna.
Ron Westlake, director of regional services, says the city has watched the saga of Curtis Road for years and has a renewed interest in the outcome, especially given that the so-called Rails with Trails program has ground to a halt.
“I guess if they could work it out amongst themselves, then we would have an interest,” said Westlake.
The Rails with Trails program, already partially complete along the railway right-of-way beside Clement Ave., was stopped when CN Rail said they would no longer allow the multi-use corridor along its track because of concerns about vandalism.
But without the last segment, from Spall Road out to UBCO, the trail goes nowhere and leaves UBCO without a safe, legal route for bicycle and pedestrian traffic. “We fully expected two trails to UBCO, one from Roberts Lake and the other from Rutland,” Westlake added.
Westlake said the city is considering alternatives to Rails with Trails regardless of what happens with Curtis Road.
“We need something from the Rutland side,” he said. “Even if something were to happen with Curtis Road, it is a long and circuitous route from Rutland.”
Westlake said his words are hypothetical, because no contact has been made with either UBCO or the Curtis Road residents, and the cost of maintaining it is not known.
“They have not approached us, but I think there would be a public interest in the road; if they were to offer it to the city, our contribution would be to maintain it,” he said.
Two other possible routes from Glenmore into UBCO are too far away to be considered viable alternatives.
One route, from Glenmore Road past the north end of the landfill is in the official community plan for 2030. The other route, from south of the landfill into UBCO has been looked at but is not in the in the official community plan.
john@kelowna.com
250-575-0521
Update: 10/01/18 7:30 p.m.
By John McDonald and Andrew Bates, UBCO Phoenix
The couple named in a court injunction granting UBCO the right to use a private road easement running behind the university campus say they had little to do with the construction of the gate used to block pedestrian and bicycle traffic and wish no further involvement in the dispute.
“We…did not construct the gate nor were we party to its construction. We did not vote for it nor advocate for it,” said Michael Treschow, in an email statement to Kelowna.com.
Treschow and his wife Gillian, both employees of UBCO, said they agreed with some conditions to the construction of the gate only after being approached by a group of some of the grantees on Curtis Road. (Grantees are those granted access to and usage of the private easement.)
“In June of 2009, a coterie of the grantees asked us if they could build a gate on our property at the beginning of the easement in order to control its usage,” Treschow said. “We said that if that were the general will of the grantees, we were agreeable.”
Soon after work began on the gate in August, 2009, Treschow said it became obvious the purpose of the gate was to shut out bikes and pedestrians. The couple asked that the work stop.
In early September, some residents met with UBCO deputy vice-chancellor Doug Owram, who Treschow says then offered to help maintain the easement and even possibly allow the gate, as long as students and staff using the road were not obstructed.
The couple then consented to resumption of construction on the gate on condition that it was done legally and did not violate the covenant and did not put them in conflict with UBCO.
But soon after construction resumed, the couple were contacted by UBCO, which said it had not been consulted and advised that legal action would ensue if work was not stopped.
Through their own legal counsel, the Treschows again asked the grantees to stop work, unless they had full agreement from all parties, including UBCO; however the work continued. Further requests earned the Treschows the threat of a lawsuit from this group of their neighbours for the cost of the gate’s construction.
Despite their request that all parties come to agreement, the gate was finished and made operational in early January, when UBCO asked them again for permission to tear it down.
“We did not feel that we could give UBCO that permission without seriously damaging our already strained relationship with those of our neighbours constructing the gate and also without being subject to a lawsuit from those neighbours,” Treschow writes.
Soon after, UBCO was granted an injunction in Kelowna Law Courts recognizing its status as a grantee on the private road and granting it permission, if required, to tear the gate down.
The Treschows say that through these months they’ve been dealing with a “personal matter of grief and loss,” and want no further involvement in the dispute. They say that they “heartily wish that UBC and the grantees who constructed the gate would be able to resolve their differences in a constructive manner so that all who are entitled to use the easement will feel safe.”
Meanwhile, UBCO says opening the gate to Curtis Road is only a first step towards solving the headache that is getting to UBCO by bike, says deputy vice-chancellor Owram.
“It’s a really important issue for many people on campus, and we’re talking about just general bicycle access, not just the Curtis Road issue,” he told Kelowna.com.
On Wednesday, the B.C. Supreme Court granted UBCO the right for its community members to use the road to get to the university, which is described as “easement.”
“Our position has always been that we have that right,” Owram said. “Some road members believe that we don’t [have the right], others just rather we didn’t have it or that we were not here, because of the traffic.”
Local residents erected a gate barring access through the area, but an injunction issued by Madame Justic Alison Beame now requires them to open it.
According to Owram, this was a the low point in a long-running saga of poor relations between UBCO and the residents on the road.
“It goes back before UBCO was here; when Okanagan University College was here,” he said. “It’s been an ongoing kind of conversation, a certain amount of disagreement between the residents of the road and OUC and then UBCO around this easement right…as a pedestrian and bicycle access.”
UBCO became more involved as the gate generated more public interest.
“From our point of view, it became an issue when they put the gate up. Because that then blocks access,” he said. “[If] you know the campus, you know that bikers [now] have to go over Highway 97 and have much more dangerous access.”
Owram said that the lack of a unified voice among residents is making it difficult for UBCO to address the issue.
“There’s not one voice on the road. There are a number of voices and attitudes and positions that are individual…That’s, I think in itself, part of the difficulty,” he said.
“We’ve had meetings with road owners in the past, and have had frustration,” he added. “I would say, trying to understand exactly what position they are taking because it depends on who they are at any given moment.”
Owram claimed that there has been no friction between UBCO and the Treschows.
“The gate happens to be on the land of one university professor, but there is no enmity or hostility there,” he said. “We’re certainly trying to keep distinct roles as property owners and our roles [here], which is important.”
When asked about whether or not the university would be willing to provide maintenence, Owram wouldn’t comment.
“This is all up for future discussion, I believe,“ he said. “I think we have to see how events unfold before I can comment on future steps.“
The university is also exploring other avenues to help provide access to campus, but Owram claimed that there was difficulty.
“We would like to see the Rails to Trails program brought into being; we’re trying to work with the city to have this happen,“ he said.
In August, Kelowna.com reported that CN Rail was blocking the planned multi-use pathways along its rail system out of concerns about vandalism.
“We regret CN’s somewhat resistant attitude towards that,“ Owram told Kelowna.com. “We think there are solutions.“
Owram did maintain a hope that better bike access will benefit everyone, including the disgruntled Curtis Road residents.
“I think the city and the university will have to work together over the longer term to find a good bicycle access that, to some extent, would resolve the irritation of the Curtis Road residents as well,“ he said. “It might resolve the problem if we have a good bike path coming on to campus.”
Update: 10/01/16 6 a.m.
By Kathy Michaels
Curtis Road property owners who put up a gate blocking UBCO students and staff access to the back of the campus may be complying with a court order to let traffic through, but they aren’t letting the university off easy.
According to a letter distributed by Kelowna lawyer Tom Smithwick, the university’s application to obtain an injunction for the removal of the gate was inappropriate because the property owners weren’t informed of the legal move that would ultimately result in their property being taken down.
It also goes against what the majority of Curtis Road residents want and taking all elements into consideration, they’ll be making an application to the courts to change the way the area in question is used.
“The owners of the private properties abutting UBC Okanagan approved the installation of the gate on their private property and easement by a vote of 10 out of 12 owners,” he wrote. “A clear majority of the owners favoured a placement of the gate in order to bring proper control on the improper intrusio into their private property.”
Smithwick went on to say that the property owners have had to deal with hundreds if not thousands of people crossing through their private property as though it was a public roadway. Worse yet, he claims they’ve also been subject to property damage, vandalism, rude behaviour and harassment.
“No one who owns private property and witnessing this occurring in their backyard would tolerate it,” he wrote.
And, he wrote, the Easement Agreement which allowed for traffic to pass through to the university from Glenmore is no longer viable because the conditions have changed since the deal was set.
That area was never intended to service so many people and with maintenance costs and liability concerns falling entirely on the shoulders of the property owners and as the university continues to grow, residents concerns escalate, he said, inviting the university and the City of Kelowna to take responsibility.
Until that time, the property owners are going to seek an Order of the Court to cancel the easement based on the fact that usage has changed significantly in recent years.
kathy@kelowna.com
By John McDonald and Andrew Bates, UBCO Phoenix
The owners of the property on which a gate was built denying UBCO students and staff access to the back of the campus have said they will comply with the order.
Michael and Jill Treschow, owners of the property on Curtis Road, did not immediately respond to a request for an interview. However, in a printout of an undated email, attached to court documents, the Treschows did respond to Hubert Lai, general counsel for UBC.
“As we have stated it is our hope and expectation that the grantees to the Curtis Road easement will work out their differences among themselves. We recognize that the grantees have both a right and responsibility to maintain the easement. We also recognize UBC’s status as a grantee to the covenated easement. We therefore do not and will not oppose or obstruct any legal actions that UBC or any of other grantees to the covenated easement, take to secure and maintain rights of access to the easement as it crosses our property,” the email reads.
Treschow is a professor at UBCO and his wife works in the university library.
Meanwhile, the race director of the Campus-to-Campus road race say it is too late to change this year’s race course back to the old course, which ran down Dry Valley and Curtis Roads.
The race was an annual target of protests by residents along the private road.
Last year’s start line was changed at the last minute when some residents threated to block the passage of runners with a barricade.
UBCO withdrew as a sponsor from this year’s Campus-to-Campus when it could not resolve the issue.
Despite Wednesday’s injunction granting full access to UBCO, race director Christine Ulmer said it wouldn’t be possible to switch it back before the March 28 race.
“We have to have the course approved by the city and provide a traffic management plan,” she said. “We’re to far into it for this year.”
Ulmer said the race organizing committee would definitely try to bring back UBCO as the start line for next year’s race.
“It’s an awesome course,” she said. “It’s great for the runners to be able to start beside the UBCO gym, where it’s warm and there’s washrooms.”
Update: 1:24 p.m.
By John McDonald and Andrew Bates, UBCO Phoenix
UBC Okanagan has obtained an injunction against two Dry Valley Road residents who constructed a gate barring pedestrian and cyclist access to what they insist is a private road.
The injunction, granted by Madame Justice Allison Beams in B.C. Supreme Court in Kelowna, confirms an easement for permanent access for UBCO and allows the university to remove the metal gate blocking the road (sometimes known as Curtis Road).
Michael and Gillian Treschow, named as defendants in the application for injunction, have refused comment. They did not appear in court to contest it.
Bud Mortensen, spokesman for UBCO, said vice-deputy chancellor Doug Owram and the university’s legal council have received the injunction and will review it before commenting.
UBCO’s Garry Appleton, manager of security and parking, and Hubert Lai, the Vancouver-based legal counsel for the university both gave affidavits in support of the application.
Appleton said the gate crossing the road was constructed around Oct. 1, 2009 on the lot owned by the defendants. Once finished, the gate was left open until early January of this year.
Appleton swears in his affidavit that the gate appears to have been constructed with the intention of preventing a person riding a bicycle or a pedestrian from walking or cycling around the gate.
On the instructions of Lai, Appleton had a locksmith use boron alloy chain to lock the gate in an open position just after Christmas, but by Jan. 1 someone had removed the chains and locks.
The next day, Appleton says the gate was closed and locked and an airphone had been installed allowing guests to contact homeowners to operate the gate. It could also be operated through a pressure pad, electronic fob or keypad code.
Shortly after, Appleton says a sign was put up beside the gate, pronouncing Curtis Road a private drive.
In conclusion, Appleton says the gate has cut off access to any pedestrian and bicycle access, traffic he estimates amounts to some 25 to 50 people each day.
In his affidavit, Lai says the university, as owners of lot A on the private road, are entitled through an easement to access for its “servants, licensees and invitees.” He established ownership through a land title search.
Lai notes in his affidavit that the easement has been “continuously used as a walking and bicycle path for student, staff and other members of the public using the facilities offered by Okanagan University College” since 1992. Ownership of the campus was transfered to UBC Okanagan in 2005.
He describes it as an important method of access for the institution that is generally considered the safe pedestrian and bicycling route to the campus.
According to Lai, since the gate was closed in early January, the university has received numerous complaints from people trying to use the access, some of whom reported being accosted and harassed by “individuals who appear to be property owners whose lands are crossed by the easement.”
Lai goes on to say he is “very concerned” about the possibility of a violent confrontation unless access is restored.
He says that two key fobs that could operate the gate were delivered to deputy vice chancellor Owram on Jan. 4 but that they clearly do not “represent a reasonable or viable method of access” for UBCO.
john@kelowna.com
By John McDonald
The long-simmering dispute between UBC Okanagan and residents of a private road that skirts the backside of the university campus has prompted Okanagan College to change the route of the Campus-to-Campus road running race.
Organizers announced today the route for this year’s Campus-to-Campus and UBC Okanagan is conspicuously absent from the race map. The race was so named because the point-to-point style race started at UBC Okanagan and ended at Okanagan College’s KLO Campus.
Race director Christine Ulmer told Kelowna.com that the race committee asked UBCO to resolve the issue after last year’s race where the start line was changed at the last minute when Curtis Road (sometimes called Dry Valley Road) residents threatened to block passage of the runners with a barricade.
“That provided some logistical issues not being able to use it,” said Ulmer. “We had to move a lot of runners around and it wasn’t good.”
Residents recently constructed a motorized gate across the entrance to the private road, something UBCO has vowed to fight with legal action.
Without a start line available at UBCO, the decision was made to run this year’s race out and back from the Okanagan College KLO Campus.
“Logistically, it’s better starting here and here, with a warm place to wait before the race and afterward.”
Ulmer said the college is not ruling out returning to the original route if UBC Okanagan can resolve its differences with the private road owners.
john@kelowna.com
One Response to “Update: City would consider taking over private road and maintaining it”
Tags: campus to campus, curtis road, gillian treschow, michael treschow, Tom Smithwick, UBC Okanagan
loading...
The road should be taken over by the city or someone else
in legal authority and openned to the general public.
I do agree with the land owners, that they are concerned
about liability if someone gets injured. The cure is to
take over the road upgrade it and operate it as city owned
land.
Please continue discussion on the forum: link