Vernon to voice concerns over new rules restricting public input on housing zoning

Under Bill 44, councils are no longer permitted to hold public hearings where an OCP is already in place, proposed zoning bylaws align with the OCP, for a proposed development that is fully or partially residential, and that the residential component of the development accounts for at least half the gross floor area of the building(s) or structure(s).

Public notice requirements for rezoning or zoning amendments are unchanged under the legislation.

Public hearings can still be held at council’s discretion for proposed zoning amendments for commercial, industrial or mixed-used developments where any residential portions account for less than half the gross net floor area.

The intent of the legislation was to stop NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) complaints from derailing a conversation about a project and focusing on issues not involved in a development application, resulting in an application being denied for reasons aside from the proposed rezoning.

At council’s meeting Monday, January 8, Vernon staff presented the elected reps with details on the bill and Terry Barton, Director of Planning and Community Services, said the intent was to have municipalities develop OCPs with consistent zoning by the end of 2025 in order to streamline housing development approvals, though acknowledged they were in the “interim” phase and that trying to navigate the change was “messy.”

City council received the report and then expressed their concerns with the legislation.

Mayor Victor Cumming said the existing OCP had roughly 30 categories that were broken down into 90 specific zones, and that under Bill 44, changing between zones in a category would not require a public hearing unless the OCP was changed to be much more specific with its categorization of property types.

In response, Barton said future OCPs would likely see much fewer land-use designation categories.

Cumming told Vernon Matters another concern was that this approach intends to cut down on NIMBYism, which he feels has not been a problem in Vernon.

“So we have a solution in Vernon to a problem that does not exist, and we’ve lost a lot of community control of neighbourhood form and neighbourhood densities and items like that, which are very critical to people actually living in those neighbourhoods,” Cumming said.

“We haven’t had those problems. Yes, we’ve had some controversial changes in zoning, and as it should be, people have been very active and expressed their opinion openly. We’ve had some large public meetings, and that is exactly the mechanism that I would think that is required, and that is how you have a robust discussion.”

He also expressed concern with a policy aimed a dealing with problems faced in large city centres being implemented in a smaller community like Vernon.

Cumming also touted the importance of the public engagement aspect of developing a community.

“I think [public input is] critical. It’s something that I personally studied in the 1970s, mid-1970s, this critical component of public participation in decision making, and our land planning system has embraced that in a very rigid, positively rigid manner, where you need to do this and you need to do this and you need to do this, so that it’s baked into our planning process,” Cumming told Vernon Matters.

“Now some of this legislation removes that and I think that’s an error. I think public participation is a good thing. Is it sometimes sandpaper against sandpaper? Absolutely, and that gives us a mechanism to have the open conversation and community.”

Other members of council also raised concerns at the meeting Monday.

Brian Quiring said projects in the past were not approved by council, despite meeting OCP requirements, and was concerned that the legislation would take away council’s ability to deny applications in the future.

Kari Gares said removing public engagement would not be beneficial to the community, calling it an “over the top” response to projects being shut down because of NIMBYism.

Teresa Durning said the bill “takes away the autonomy of council,” puts pressure on city staff, and takes the voice away from residents.

Upon received the report, which council voted unanimously to receive for information, Councillor Brian Guy put forward a motion to have Mayor Cumming communicate these concerns to the province, which was amended to be an in-person meeting instead of a letter or phone call at the request of Gares.

Cumming noted he would also likely bring a staff member or another councillor to the meeting in order to convey the importance of the issues brought forward.

Council voted unanimously in support of the motion.

by Liam Verster

Vernon to voice concerns over new rules restricting public input on housing zoning

What Matters