A landowner along Three Mile Road says he is shocked and stunned by Penticton city council’s decision to investigate making part of Three Mile Beach clothing-optional.
At their last regular council meeting on March 2, council directed city staff to look into ways of designating portions of the beach as clothing optional, or installing berms or landscaping to segregate usages.
It’s a decision that found favour with local activist Kevin Protea, who issued a press release this week on behalf of the 3-Mile Naturist Beach Committee.
“Considering that Three Mile Beach has traditionally been used as a clothing-optional destination for almost 100 years, we are happy to see this history being acknowledged,” said Proteau. “It is clear to us that they are trying to be fair and considerate of everyone involved.”
Wayne Bazen, who lived on Three Mile Road for a decade and has cancelled plans to build a new million-dollar home there, disagrees.
“Neither option is acceptable to us,” said Bazen.
He thinks council may not understand what is going on at the beach, noting that there is confusion about the historical use of the beach for skinny dipping.
Bazen said it is true that the area has had a clothing optional beach for many years, but only a secluded section, away from the main beach.
“The public portion has never been used as a nude beach. All the nudity has taken place by way of an illegal trespass on private property,” said Bazen.
That was the start of the current controversy, when landowner Cary Pinkowski chose to list his land for sale last year and closed access through it to the secluded beach area. Naturists responded by shifting to the open section of beach, causing homeowners in the area to protest.
Proteau also supports a proposition made by Coun. Helena Konanz that an area of the beach currently designated as a dog beach be allocated as a public beach, with the northern section be made clothing optional.
“The 3MNBC also believes that resources would be better allocated there, rather than to split up the 150 metres of beach on the north side. This would address all the issues being discussed and would provide a win-win situation for the public, residents, naturists and the city,” said Proteau.
Bazen said that is hardly a solution either. Not only would it leave a nude beach in full view of the homeowners, but the dog beach is rocky, while the north beach is sandy.
Proteau said that could be taken care of by trucking in sand and upgrading the south beach.
“It would take a couple of bucks, but it is very little cost to make that a beautiful beach,” he said.
Bazen pointed out that Kelowna had to deal with a similar situation at Cedar Creek Beach, also known as Beau Sejour.
Originally a private beach popular with nudists, the beach was acquired by the city of Kelowna in the late 1990s. Concerns over the nudists prompted the city to install signs notifying users that nudity at this beach is neither permitted or condoned by the city and may be subject to prosecution and also that acts of gross indecency will be prosecuted.
Bazen said he will be attending the April 7 meeting, when city staff is expected to report back to council.
“Council sounds bound and determined to make a decision on this,” he said, noting that making the beach clothing-optional would harm the interests of landowners.
“I am not going to build there if this is a nude beach. We have all been harmed, our property has been devalued.”
Proteau said he understands this is a difficult issue for council to deal with.
“We applaud their efforts and can empathize over the difficulty of their task. 3MNBC therefore stands ready to assist and advise if anyone so wishes,” he said.