Newsletter December 18th, 2020 - It’s easier to fool people than to……….”
“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled”, Mark Twain. Perhaps this would have been Oak Bay’s Vision statement had it not been for Oak Bay residents’ reputation for being difficult to deceive. The District’s deception however, has been the ongoing lack of transparency; withholding reports and information which makes it extremely difficult to be informed; the public engagement process problem etc.
Residents have been expected to blindly accept claims by the Planning Department and the District with no details provided. For example:
1. December 3rd, 2020 Oak Bay News front page article: The District will be seeking parking to, “ensure minimal impact on the existing street and neighbourhood character”.
2. Same article: “Requiring on site parking must be balanced with the desire to retain significant amounts of green space and tree canopy cover”.
3. Subdivision proposals are presented without an indication of what the built form will look like. The plans are provided long after Council and Commissions have given their approval.
4. District Vision Statement: “Residents are active contributors in local decision-making, working collaboratively with municipal Council and staff”.
However, what is clear is, “the Devil is in the (missing) details”.
In example #1: Is it possible to maintain street and neighbourhood character when a new influx of cars has to be parked on site or in the street? If so, where is the evidence that other municipalities have been able to do this?
In example #2: It is not possible to pave over lots for off-street parking and at the same time save green space, trees, ecological integrity and streetscapes. These are incompatible objectives. To claim otherwise is to insult the intelligence of Oak Bay residents.
In example #3: Oak Bay Watch’s future Newsletters will explain and provide examples of how the Planning Department’s subdivision and land assembly process has become a major over-building and character destroying problem (see oakbaywatch.com).
In example #4: “residents working collaboratively with Council and staff and being actively involved in decision making”. Merely listening without hearing residents cannot be considered collaboration in decision making.
If there were examples of these outlandish Planning Staff claims they should identify where this has been accomplished and which can be verified. There are only examples of additional suite parking and other serious impacts causing serious unsolvable problems.
Before the 2018 election, Council members recognized and should have recognized (given the number of resident protests) that the Planning Department’s development process needed to be addressed and effective policies implemented: however, there has been no direction to staff to follow through on this.
For many years now the #1 resident concern has been to correct the broken zoning bylaw and stop the obvious over-building that is at the root of many other District land-use problems. Today demolitions and overbuilding lots are a regular occurrence in Oak Bay’s single-family neighbourhoods.
Council has admitted the broken Zoning Bylaw needs to be corrected and policies implemented: however, prioritizing this with Planning Staff and collaborating with residents has not been on any Council agenda. Indeed, it has been pushed to 2022.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective (read on for much more information)
The Reality
The developer mantra is that, unless we can build-out single family lots to the maximum, over-build subdivisions and construct multi-dwelling condo developments, it is not economically feasible. However, what if the major zoning change blunders of 2007 and 2014 had not been made.
Oak Bay’s Zoning Bylaw, according to the Director of Planning at that time, had served the District very well and was highly respected by the Architectural Community as being the best balanced in the Capitol Regional District. Before this was tampered with by a small “carefully selected” Floor Area Review Committee, buildings had to remain proportionate to their lot and development had not stopped, in fact far from it.
Some Councillors and the planning staff have often used developer lobbying terms and positions when it comes to “selling” over-densification initiatives. For example, “missing middle”, “more supply”, mortgage helpers etc. are repeatedly stated by some Council members and staff.
It must be noted, however that, Vancouver has developed an abundance of this kind of over-densification development for many years now. “Missing-middle” housing includes: adding 3 infill units on thousands of single-family lots; land assembly - many town-house developments are present in every Vancouver neighbourhood and the City’s condominium development has reached the over-supply stage.
What has been the result of all the development of this housing options “supply” and what is lesson for Oak Bay?
Added to all this is a brand-new Vancouver proposal in the works which is to have all street-parking permit only. How much more ecologically-damaging on-site paving will this result in? And despite the fact that more and more rapid transit has been added, commuting by car and car use has not declined. Statistics show that, like Vancouver Island, more cars are licensed every year.
“Mortgage helpers” can be achieved by having 2 tenants due to rents being so high. With more than 2-tenants, enforcement control in Vancouver and many other communities has become more and more difficult.
For example, in Vancouver, 3 suite rental businesses on a singe-family lot and Airbnb controls are major problems. Boarding houses are everywhere, absentee landlords abound and there are many more unregistered untaxed suites on single-family lots. Vancouver’s property taxes are the highest in Canada.
As for the Planning Department’s outlandish claims, saying it doesn’t make it so. Asserting something without explanation or demonstration is known as an empty assertion. There have been no examples provided where basement suite parking has had minimal impact, saved green-space and not lined streets with parked cars.
Unsubstantiated development-industry clichés and buzz-words without proven evidence means they are rhetorical and simply opinions. Earlier in the year Oak Bay engaged a Communications (Public Relations) Specialist whose role it is to “mange the District’s public image”.
Inevitably, this means information would not be provided that would show the District in a bad light. Therefore, not only is this information limited, it is biased. And worse still, more often than not, the Communication Specialist’s information employs a good deal of “spin”. To obtain unbiased and factual reporting residents should expect this to be provided by:
However, some of members of Council, staff continue to quote the above noted special-interest “spin”, clichés and buzz-words and unsupported by proven evidence - this is unacceptable.
-------------------------------------------------------
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch will continue to provide verifiable information to residents. Such information has all but disappeared from the pages of the Oak Bay News and also with the advent of a District Communications Specialist. Our advertising in the Oak Bay News will inform residents - the information is at oakbaywatch.com.
The Covid-19 pandemic has restricted public input at Council meetings. Council has a full agenda early 2021. This includes another round of budget increases, suspect development initiatives, the District’s urgent upgrading issues, the Oak Bay Lodge Consultation and Decision Process, the Turkey Head Marina lease renewal, and hopefully a vital revisiting of a Floor Area Review and Zoning correction etc.
Keep informed and if you can, assist us with our Oak Bay News advertising and public awareness initiatives: all donations no matter the amount are appreciated.
[
“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled”, Mark Twain. Perhaps this would have been Oak Bay’s Vision statement had it not been for Oak Bay residents’ reputation for being difficult to deceive. The District’s deception however, has been the ongoing lack of transparency; withholding reports and information which makes it extremely difficult to be informed; the public engagement process problem etc.
Residents have been expected to blindly accept claims by the Planning Department and the District with no details provided. For example:
1. December 3rd, 2020 Oak Bay News front page article: The District will be seeking parking to, “ensure minimal impact on the existing street and neighbourhood character”.
2. Same article: “Requiring on site parking must be balanced with the desire to retain significant amounts of green space and tree canopy cover”.
3. Subdivision proposals are presented without an indication of what the built form will look like. The plans are provided long after Council and Commissions have given their approval.
4. District Vision Statement: “Residents are active contributors in local decision-making, working collaboratively with municipal Council and staff”.
However, what is clear is, “the Devil is in the (missing) details”.
In example #1: Is it possible to maintain street and neighbourhood character when a new influx of cars has to be parked on site or in the street? If so, where is the evidence that other municipalities have been able to do this?
In example #2: It is not possible to pave over lots for off-street parking and at the same time save green space, trees, ecological integrity and streetscapes. These are incompatible objectives. To claim otherwise is to insult the intelligence of Oak Bay residents.
In example #3: Oak Bay Watch’s future Newsletters will explain and provide examples of how the Planning Department’s subdivision and land assembly process has become a major over-building and character destroying problem (see oakbaywatch.com).
In example #4: “residents working collaboratively with Council and staff and being actively involved in decision making”. Merely listening without hearing residents cannot be considered collaboration in decision making.
If there were examples of these outlandish Planning Staff claims they should identify where this has been accomplished and which can be verified. There are only examples of additional suite parking and other serious impacts causing serious unsolvable problems.
Before the 2018 election, Council members recognized and should have recognized (given the number of resident protests) that the Planning Department’s development process needed to be addressed and effective policies implemented: however, there has been no direction to staff to follow through on this.
For many years now the #1 resident concern has been to correct the broken zoning bylaw and stop the obvious over-building that is at the root of many other District land-use problems. Today demolitions and overbuilding lots are a regular occurrence in Oak Bay’s single-family neighbourhoods.
Council has admitted the broken Zoning Bylaw needs to be corrected and policies implemented: however, prioritizing this with Planning Staff and collaborating with residents has not been on any Council agenda. Indeed, it has been pushed to 2022.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective (read on for much more information)
The Reality
The developer mantra is that, unless we can build-out single family lots to the maximum, over-build subdivisions and construct multi-dwelling condo developments, it is not economically feasible. However, what if the major zoning change blunders of 2007 and 2014 had not been made.
Oak Bay’s Zoning Bylaw, according to the Director of Planning at that time, had served the District very well and was highly respected by the Architectural Community as being the best balanced in the Capitol Regional District. Before this was tampered with by a small “carefully selected” Floor Area Review Committee, buildings had to remain proportionate to their lot and development had not stopped, in fact far from it.
Some Councillors and the planning staff have often used developer lobbying terms and positions when it comes to “selling” over-densification initiatives. For example, “missing middle”, “more supply”, mortgage helpers etc. are repeatedly stated by some Council members and staff.
It must be noted, however that, Vancouver has developed an abundance of this kind of over-densification development for many years now. “Missing-middle” housing includes: adding 3 infill units on thousands of single-family lots; land assembly - many town-house developments are present in every Vancouver neighbourhood and the City’s condominium development has reached the over-supply stage.
What has been the result of all the development of this housing options “supply” and what is lesson for Oak Bay?
- Vancouver’s Councils have been influenced to keep increasing these “housing options” resulting in an ever-increasing supply.
- Housing prices for all types have escalated, fueled by speculation and, as often as not, with offshore funding;
- Liveability has continued to decline;
- Congestion is a major issue and is getting worse;
- Single-family neighbourhoods are the next target for much more over-densification (e.g. a new Mayor’s initiative would allow 4-plex conversions in all single-family homes.
Added to all this is a brand-new Vancouver proposal in the works which is to have all street-parking permit only. How much more ecologically-damaging on-site paving will this result in? And despite the fact that more and more rapid transit has been added, commuting by car and car use has not declined. Statistics show that, like Vancouver Island, more cars are licensed every year.
“Mortgage helpers” can be achieved by having 2 tenants due to rents being so high. With more than 2-tenants, enforcement control in Vancouver and many other communities has become more and more difficult.
For example, in Vancouver, 3 suite rental businesses on a singe-family lot and Airbnb controls are major problems. Boarding houses are everywhere, absentee landlords abound and there are many more unregistered untaxed suites on single-family lots. Vancouver’s property taxes are the highest in Canada.
As for the Planning Department’s outlandish claims, saying it doesn’t make it so. Asserting something without explanation or demonstration is known as an empty assertion. There have been no examples provided where basement suite parking has had minimal impact, saved green-space and not lined streets with parked cars.
Unsubstantiated development-industry clichés and buzz-words without proven evidence means they are rhetorical and simply opinions. Earlier in the year Oak Bay engaged a Communications (Public Relations) Specialist whose role it is to “mange the District’s public image”.
Inevitably, this means information would not be provided that would show the District in a bad light. Therefore, not only is this information limited, it is biased. And worse still, more often than not, the Communication Specialist’s information employs a good deal of “spin”. To obtain unbiased and factual reporting residents should expect this to be provided by:
- The Council members they elected to represent them and;
- The Planning and Administration staff they employ to ensure the public interest is respected.
However, some of members of Council, staff continue to quote the above noted special-interest “spin”, clichés and buzz-words and unsupported by proven evidence - this is unacceptable.
-------------------------------------------------------
“Nothing is inevitable if you are paying attention” Oak Bay Watch
Oak Bay Watch will continue to provide verifiable information to residents. Such information has all but disappeared from the pages of the Oak Bay News and also with the advent of a District Communications Specialist. Our advertising in the Oak Bay News will inform residents - the information is at oakbaywatch.com.
The Covid-19 pandemic has restricted public input at Council meetings. Council has a full agenda early 2021. This includes another round of budget increases, suspect development initiatives, the District’s urgent upgrading issues, the Oak Bay Lodge Consultation and Decision Process, the Turkey Head Marina lease renewal, and hopefully a vital revisiting of a Floor Area Review and Zoning correction etc.
Keep informed and if you can, assist us with our Oak Bay News advertising and public awareness initiatives: all donations no matter the amount are appreciated.
[