Kamloops-area property owners want judge to settle years-long dispute with BC Hydro

The owners of a property near Logan Lake are taking BC Hydro to court, asking a judge to step in to stop the Crown corporation from starting unwelcome archeological work on their land.

BC Hydro, meanwhile, has started the expropriation process, through which it can legally take over a piece of land without the consent of the owner.

BC Hydro is in the process of upgrading its transmission lines west of Kamloops, part of Teck’s extension of the Highland Valley Copper mine.

That work requires access to a property near Logan Lake belonging to Colin Parkinson, Amy Parkinson and Jenny Garthwaite. Specifically, BC Hydro said it requires two rights of way on the property — one for a transmission line and another for a permanent access road.

“BC Hydro has determined that, as part of the project, in order to ensure that it does not contravene the [Heritage Conservation Act], it will need to undertake archeological impact assessments and other archeological work,” BC Hydro said this week in a court filing.

The property owners don’t want that to happen — at least not without adequate compensation.

They said they do not consent to any archeology work “absent clear statutory authority," and they want a judge to decide what happens next. They said they are concerned that the work could devalue the property.

“The respondent [BC Hydro] has threatened the expropriation if the petitioners do not agree to permit archeological work, without offering compensation for the risk or potential loss in property value,” their petition reads.

“The petitioners have agreed to all other aspects of the right of way, other than the archeology conditions."

’No known archeological sites'

According to BC Hydro, the area has been identified as having a "high potential” for archeological finds. Because of that, the power producer said it has no choice but to investigate.

“Since the HCA prohibits damage to heritage objects and sites, known or otherwise, without a permit, the archeological works are necessary in order to ensure that ground-disturbing work does not result in a contravention of the HCA,” reads BC Hydro’s response to the petition.

The property owners, however, say there is nothing to indicate anything of significance will be found.

“No known archeological sites exist on the petitioners’ lands as recorded in the provincial registry,” they said in their petition.

BC Hydro said any field work it carries out will be “low impact."

“BC Hydro has communicated to the petitioners that it plans to make best efforts to avoid ground disturbance where possible,” their response reads.

“BC Hydro has also explained to the petitioners why it is necessary for BC Hydro to conduct archeological works by way of written and verbal communications, including at a meeting where an expert on the subject matter attended.”

Expropriation process started

BC Hydro said discussions with the property owners have been ongoing for more than two years.

The Crown corporation began the expropriation process earlier this year. The property owners were served with a notice of expropriation on March 30.

In their petition, they called that “an overreach” of BC Hydro's powers and they accused the company of acting in bad faith.

BC Hydro pushed back on that.

“BC Hydro has the broad power to expropriate any property for any purpose related to the exercise of its powers, and it is an expropriating authority,” their response reads.

“As set out above, the project is necessary for BC Hydro to meet its statutory purposes and obligations, and the [rights of way] are required for this project."

The case is scheduled to go in front of a B.C. Supreme Court judge on Monday, when the property owners will ask for an order preventing BC Hydro from accessing their land until the larger legal issue is sorted out.

BC Hydro said it is confident the landowners don't have a case.

"The petition raises no serious questions to be tried," the BC Hydro response reads.

"In British Columbia, expropriation of private property rights is permitted by law in the province and does not amount to unfair treatment."