NEWSLETTER July 9th, 2017
Bare Land Strata Subdivisions – Council’s New Densification Threat.
Why is Council endorsing Strata Subdivision Developments and placing most Oak Bay residents at risk?
Four Council members' recent statements and actions have made it clear their goal is to add a lot of density to our Community. However, Council’s bare land strata subdivision concept (Oak Bay Edition) is even a level above over-densification. The problem for residents is this type of invasive development allows joining two or more lots together, overriding the Zoning and Tree Bylaws. Each lot can now have not one but twoover-built houses. Additionally most of the remaining space in the subdivision can be paved over allowing most trees and vegetation to be removed. In other words the resident protections of the zoning bylaw regarding: the minimum size of a lot; tree and vegetation retention; and impacts on neighboring properties are now lost. Two very big houses can be built next to adjacent normally-proportioned properties - the bigger the lot, the bigger the houses and complex that will be permitted.
This demonstrates that Council is ignoring hundreds of resident complaints, community groups, the Official Community Plan and their own recent Satisfaction Survey. This Survey found the number-one community concern was over-densification. The development consultation processes that this Council has set up heavily favors developers and also the fast tracking of development approvals. The results are that limited public consultation and developments that far exceed our zoning and parking requirements are on the rise.
The 2007 Council Zoning mistake allowed an “overly large, intrusive house” (Council terms) to be built on a minimum sized lot (see Appendix 1 for background information). Although admitted by Council, this zoning mistake has never been corrected.
Nevertheless in 2016 Oak Bay Council approved a strata subdivision on Fair Street – a quiet, small residential street just north of Oak Bay High School. To accommodate this strata subdivision, two side-by-side residential lots were combined. This newly created strata subdivision was then clear-cut and almost all mature trees and vegetation were removed. Most of the lot was then paved over and two oversized, pressboard houses were built on each of the two lots. Today four very big houses now sit on the two original lots. In effect the strata subdivision allowed the two original lots to be divided into four lots that are far below the smallest size lot the zoning bylaw allows. An access road takes up much of the remaining strata subdivision area. The replacement trees that will take decades to mature (if they survive) appear very inadequate.
Another of these strata subdivisions is now proposed. This one is on King George Terrace, adjacent to the world-renowned, Lookout and Trafalgar Park. Again on a residential street – only this time on Oak Bay’s primary scenic route in this strategic location. The residents most impacted as well as the public received no Municipal notification of this very large strata subdivision application. Oak Bay Watch brought it to local residents' attention.
Why does this development set off very loud alarm bells? (Read on for more information).
On June 6th, 2017 the Advisory Planning Commission considered the King George Terrace, four-lot bare land strata residential subdivision application. The Commission reviewed the Application and Planning Report that indicated the Strata Application was under review. The Commission’s policy is not to allow any public consultation on any matter under consideration; only unrestricted developer input is permitted! At this meeting two Commission members with environmental expertise requested a copy of the King George Terrace Developer’s April 2017 Environmental Report. However, although completed and available, it was not provided!
Both Commissioners informed the Chair they could not recommend the application without viewing the full environmental information. They subsequently voted against the Commission’s approval motion that recommended the Application be moved forward to Council for approval. The two dissenting commissioners' concern was that this strata development encompasses the Foreshore Development Permit Area - therefore much more (heritage, geological, archaeological and environmental etc.) scrutiny is required to protect our shoreline and the Provincial Bird Sanctuary which supports a population of about 5000 regional wintering birds.
On June 19, 2017 the King George Terrace Strata Application was considered by Council at the Committee of the Whole. Council received many local resident and community submissions protesting the scale of the application and the process to date. However Mayor Jensen blocked all resident discussion and Council debate on the strata development’s non-compliance with the Zoning Bylaws, the Urban Forest Strategy and the Official Community Plan. The Mayor insisted that input was to be restricted to the proportion of the lot that encompasses the Shoreline Development Permit Area. Mayor Jensen emphasized several times that subdivisions are out of Council’s hands and it is the District’s Approving Officer only who approves subdivision development permits.
However is this true? Can it be that local government approving officers have total unrestricted discretionary power to override zoning, tree bylaws and the community interests? Many other Municipalities control these developments through their subdivision bylaw. Oak Bay has a subdivision bylaw: however, strata subdivisions are not referenced and therefore regulation is being avoided.
What is disturbing about the approval process and the Mayor’s approach is this:
Additionally the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation indicated the subject of their resolution was the total Strata Development - not just the much smaller shoreline development area. The June 19, 2017 Council Committee of the Whole considered Development Permit # 00015. The Permit includes both the bare land strata subdivision area (the majority) and also the shoreline development permit area. Therefore, as both the strata subdivision and the Community Plan shoreline permit area (the entire lot) are combined in Development Permit # 00015 – the Mayor should not have been preventing any of the Community’s or Council’s viewpoints from being presented.
The Corporate Services Department justified no public input being allowed at the Advisory Planning Commission (this is not the policy of other Oak Bay Commissions). The Corporate Services Department had led neighbours to believe that the appropriate place to make their views known was at the June 19 Committee of the Whole COW (See email Appendix # 2). The Mayor however still insisted he would only allow resident and Council input to address the Shoreline Development Permit Area.
It may well be that now Council has approved work to begin in the subdivision foreshore area, and the Approving Officer has provided preliminary approval - there may be no public opportunity for public input!
Note in 2011 a previous Council denied a much smaller subdivision proposal directly across the street from this proposed development. It had no shoreline area or many of the implications involved in the currentKing George Terrace Bare Land Strata Subdivision.
Council’s decision making on this Bare Land Strata Development to date:
Why the Community is at risk:
The Developer’s bare land strata benefits (Oak Bay Edition):
* To be able to ignore many of the requirements set out in our Zoning Bylaw, the Community Plan and Subdivision Bylaw.
* This allows maximum square foot lot coverage. n and Subdivision Bylaw. Twice the number of houses can be built.on far less than the zoning's minimum lot size (more over-building means much more profit.
* To disregard the Official Community Plan’s policy on resident protections; to allow expanded access areas (private laneways); permit the elimination of existing tree canopy and disregard the impact on neighbours.
* Provide only developer funded and selected reports to Council, staff, the public and the Advisory Planning Commission.
Why the Community is at risk?
* The existing development permit approval process is flawed. However, even though Council admits this, all Community consultation on the application to date has been shut out.
* Council is oblivious to the serious long-term impacts of allowing virtually unrestricted Bare Land Strata Subdivisions in our single-family neighbourhoods.
* Council has significantly expanded the District’s planning staff. However, it has failed to request information about the adverse effects these
potential invasive developments have on single-family neighbourhoods. A good start would be to enquire as to how other communities regulate these developments to protect the public interest.
Oak Bay as it exists today is why people want to visit and live here. It is why it is being marketed world-wide. Brutalism architecture (developer term for Bowker /Cadboro Bay condos), strip malls, infill, and streets lined with cars are not attractive. To date there has been no Council discussion about design standards and preservation - when obviously this is needed. Just saving the odd street or home under heritage designation will not alone protect Oak Bay’s character or desirability. This is especially true if these kinds of unrestricted developments, and now bare land strata subdivisions, are the order of the day.
Oak Bay Watch recognizes that other subdivisions exist in Oak Bay. However most are tasteful and proportionate to their surroundings. They are based on the traditional Fee Simple ownership concept. As such, they meet our subdivision bylaw rules and resident protections and therefore do not have ecological, geological, esthetic, or disruptive impacts. Other Councils have recognized that developers have discovered this loophole, which circumvents Zoning Bylaws and Community Plans and, have taken steps to protect their community. On the other hand, our Council has already ignored many of our District’s regulations and the public interest by approving the inappropriate Fair Street strata subdivision (Appendix 1). Now that they are indicating they intend to approve another, your property, street and neighbourhood could easily be next.
Please circulate this newsletter to your friends and neighbours.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Oak Bay Watch would like to thank the Oak Bay Green Committee for their very generous substantial contribution – It, like all other donations, will be used to keep residents informed.
Please sign up for our newsletter – bottom of newsletter page.
Appendix 1 Background Information
Since 2010 Oak Bay Watch and members of the community have been trying to get our Zoning Bylaws back in line with the pre 2007 zoning provisions that determined, “if you want a big house you buy a big lot”. This sentiment was expressed by our recently departed Director of Building and Planning. For some reason his recent retirement received little fanfare? Major Jensen played a major role in the 2007 bylaw zoning change by convincing Council to approve it. It has resulted in today’s overbuilding that Council’s satisfaction survey found residents do not want.
The Community Association of Oak Bay recently organized a residents’ “Jane’s Walk” to show how many older homes are being demolished and to see the new houses which are being overbuilt and do not fit in to the surroundings or the streetscape. Although there has been an attempt to correct the Council’s admitted 2007 zoning mistake – it is obvious little has changed that led to the many resident complaints to Council in 2010. At the time the Director of Building and Planning explained to Council, “ There is an inconsistency in the (Zoning) Bylaw”. Mayor Jensen (then a Council member) was directed by Council to review this zoning problem and, although he may have reviewed the zoning mistake, his findings were never brought to Council or publicized.
Appendix 2 – Email to local resident from Department of Corporate Services
Date: June 9, 2017 at 4:01:13 PM PDT
Subject: FW: Development proposal for 237 King George Terrace
Greetings,
Thank you for your correspondence regarding 237 King George Terrace. In his absence, your email was forwarded to me for response.
A copy has been provided to our Manager of Planning, and it will also be included on the agenda when this item comes forward. As we have electronic agendas, your email address, residential address, and phone number will all be severed.
Given your interest and concerns, here is a high level overview of where the proposal is in the process.
Our Committee of the Whole and Council agendas are included on our website as well here: https://www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/meetings-minutes/minutes-agendas. Agendas are posted on the Friday before a meeting. If you would like to sign up to receive email notifications, you can do so here: https://www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/contacts/subscriptions/council-agendas-minutes.
For your reference, we have two more Committee of the Whole meetings prior to summer break - on June 19 and on July 17. Before proceeding any further, the report would need to come first to one of these two meetings. Both meetings start at 7:00 PM and are held in Council Chambers at the Municipal Hall. As I mentioned above, you are welcome to attend and speak regarding your concerns.
I hope this information has been of help to you. If you have further questions regarding the process, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Deputy Director of Corporate Services
The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay
2167 Oak Bay Avenue
Victoria, BC V8R 1G2
For previous newsletters & Information visit oakbaywatch.com
Bare Land Strata Subdivisions – Council’s New Densification Threat.
Why is Council endorsing Strata Subdivision Developments and placing most Oak Bay residents at risk?
Four Council members' recent statements and actions have made it clear their goal is to add a lot of density to our Community. However, Council’s bare land strata subdivision concept (Oak Bay Edition) is even a level above over-densification. The problem for residents is this type of invasive development allows joining two or more lots together, overriding the Zoning and Tree Bylaws. Each lot can now have not one but twoover-built houses. Additionally most of the remaining space in the subdivision can be paved over allowing most trees and vegetation to be removed. In other words the resident protections of the zoning bylaw regarding: the minimum size of a lot; tree and vegetation retention; and impacts on neighboring properties are now lost. Two very big houses can be built next to adjacent normally-proportioned properties - the bigger the lot, the bigger the houses and complex that will be permitted.
This demonstrates that Council is ignoring hundreds of resident complaints, community groups, the Official Community Plan and their own recent Satisfaction Survey. This Survey found the number-one community concern was over-densification. The development consultation processes that this Council has set up heavily favors developers and also the fast tracking of development approvals. The results are that limited public consultation and developments that far exceed our zoning and parking requirements are on the rise.
The 2007 Council Zoning mistake allowed an “overly large, intrusive house” (Council terms) to be built on a minimum sized lot (see Appendix 1 for background information). Although admitted by Council, this zoning mistake has never been corrected.
Nevertheless in 2016 Oak Bay Council approved a strata subdivision on Fair Street – a quiet, small residential street just north of Oak Bay High School. To accommodate this strata subdivision, two side-by-side residential lots were combined. This newly created strata subdivision was then clear-cut and almost all mature trees and vegetation were removed. Most of the lot was then paved over and two oversized, pressboard houses were built on each of the two lots. Today four very big houses now sit on the two original lots. In effect the strata subdivision allowed the two original lots to be divided into four lots that are far below the smallest size lot the zoning bylaw allows. An access road takes up much of the remaining strata subdivision area. The replacement trees that will take decades to mature (if they survive) appear very inadequate.
Another of these strata subdivisions is now proposed. This one is on King George Terrace, adjacent to the world-renowned, Lookout and Trafalgar Park. Again on a residential street – only this time on Oak Bay’s primary scenic route in this strategic location. The residents most impacted as well as the public received no Municipal notification of this very large strata subdivision application. Oak Bay Watch brought it to local residents' attention.
Why does this development set off very loud alarm bells? (Read on for more information).
On June 6th, 2017 the Advisory Planning Commission considered the King George Terrace, four-lot bare land strata residential subdivision application. The Commission reviewed the Application and Planning Report that indicated the Strata Application was under review. The Commission’s policy is not to allow any public consultation on any matter under consideration; only unrestricted developer input is permitted! At this meeting two Commission members with environmental expertise requested a copy of the King George Terrace Developer’s April 2017 Environmental Report. However, although completed and available, it was not provided!
Both Commissioners informed the Chair they could not recommend the application without viewing the full environmental information. They subsequently voted against the Commission’s approval motion that recommended the Application be moved forward to Council for approval. The two dissenting commissioners' concern was that this strata development encompasses the Foreshore Development Permit Area - therefore much more (heritage, geological, archaeological and environmental etc.) scrutiny is required to protect our shoreline and the Provincial Bird Sanctuary which supports a population of about 5000 regional wintering birds.
On June 19, 2017 the King George Terrace Strata Application was considered by Council at the Committee of the Whole. Council received many local resident and community submissions protesting the scale of the application and the process to date. However Mayor Jensen blocked all resident discussion and Council debate on the strata development’s non-compliance with the Zoning Bylaws, the Urban Forest Strategy and the Official Community Plan. The Mayor insisted that input was to be restricted to the proportion of the lot that encompasses the Shoreline Development Permit Area. Mayor Jensen emphasized several times that subdivisions are out of Council’s hands and it is the District’s Approving Officer only who approves subdivision development permits.
However is this true? Can it be that local government approving officers have total unrestricted discretionary power to override zoning, tree bylaws and the community interests? Many other Municipalities control these developments through their subdivision bylaw. Oak Bay has a subdivision bylaw: however, strata subdivisions are not referenced and therefore regulation is being avoided.
What is disturbing about the approval process and the Mayor’s approach is this:
- The Advisory Planning Commission and the Developer had already discussed many aspects of the land use subdivision development permit at the Commission’s June 6, 2017 meeting.
- The updated Planning Report, (ten working days after the Advisory Planning Commission meeting) had been amended and now indicated that the King George Terrace Application was no longer under review but had received preliminary approval.
- This meant the Approving Officer provided this approval before the COW Council Meeting. If Mayor Jensen was right and the staff Approving Officer’s approval is outside Council’s decision making, then why was the bare land strata subdivision development permit and a resolution to “Facilitate” the four lot subdivision before Council? Why would Council approve moving this recommendation to the next Council meeting for approval – without debate?
Additionally the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation indicated the subject of their resolution was the total Strata Development - not just the much smaller shoreline development area. The June 19, 2017 Council Committee of the Whole considered Development Permit # 00015. The Permit includes both the bare land strata subdivision area (the majority) and also the shoreline development permit area. Therefore, as both the strata subdivision and the Community Plan shoreline permit area (the entire lot) are combined in Development Permit # 00015 – the Mayor should not have been preventing any of the Community’s or Council’s viewpoints from being presented.
The Corporate Services Department justified no public input being allowed at the Advisory Planning Commission (this is not the policy of other Oak Bay Commissions). The Corporate Services Department had led neighbours to believe that the appropriate place to make their views known was at the June 19 Committee of the Whole COW (See email Appendix # 2). The Mayor however still insisted he would only allow resident and Council input to address the Shoreline Development Permit Area.
It may well be that now Council has approved work to begin in the subdivision foreshore area, and the Approving Officer has provided preliminary approval - there may be no public opportunity for public input!
Note in 2011 a previous Council denied a much smaller subdivision proposal directly across the street from this proposed development. It had no shoreline area or many of the implications involved in the currentKing George Terrace Bare Land Strata Subdivision.
Council’s decision making on this Bare Land Strata Development to date:
- Council has moved the development ahead after recognizing their process is defective - e.g. no public notice or community consultation.
- Council has moved ahead without waiting for a June Council request for a staff report to address the flawed strata subdivision process.
- Provide only developer funded and selected reports to Council, staff, the public and the Advisory Planning Commission.
Why the Community is at risk:
- The existing development permit approval process is flawed. However, even though Council admits this, all Community consultation on the application to date has been shut out.
- Council is oblivious to the serious long-term impacts of allowing virtually unrestricted Bare LandStrata Subdivisions in our single-family neighbourhoods .
- Council has move ahead knowing there has been no independent studies provided.
- Council has move ahead knowing that the Approving Officer, who decided not to impose statutory safeguards, has been replaced and cannot be consulted.
- Council has move ahead knowing the Developers submitted Survey Map has a disclaimer that states, "This survey show the relative location of the surveyed feature and shall not be used to define property boundaries".
- Council has move ahead allowing the Developer to begin work, subject to development permit approval) on the environmentally sensitive Foreshore Development Area. This indicates Council is satisfied with the Developer's Survey Map that could well be inaccurate.
- Council failed to proactively incorporate rules in the subdivision bylaw that would ensure that all types of subdivisions (strata as well as fee simple) comply with our bylaws in addition to the Official Community Plan's resident protections.
The Developer’s bare land strata benefits (Oak Bay Edition):
* To be able to ignore many of the requirements set out in our Zoning Bylaw, the Community Plan and Subdivision Bylaw.
* This allows maximum square foot lot coverage. n and Subdivision Bylaw. Twice the number of houses can be built.on far less than the zoning's minimum lot size (more over-building means much more profit.
* To disregard the Official Community Plan’s policy on resident protections; to allow expanded access areas (private laneways); permit the elimination of existing tree canopy and disregard the impact on neighbours.
* Provide only developer funded and selected reports to Council, staff, the public and the Advisory Planning Commission.
Why the Community is at risk?
* The existing development permit approval process is flawed. However, even though Council admits this, all Community consultation on the application to date has been shut out.
* Council is oblivious to the serious long-term impacts of allowing virtually unrestricted Bare Land Strata Subdivisions in our single-family neighbourhoods.
* Council has significantly expanded the District’s planning staff. However, it has failed to request information about the adverse effects these
potential invasive developments have on single-family neighbourhoods. A good start would be to enquire as to how other communities regulate these developments to protect the public interest.
Oak Bay as it exists today is why people want to visit and live here. It is why it is being marketed world-wide. Brutalism architecture (developer term for Bowker /Cadboro Bay condos), strip malls, infill, and streets lined with cars are not attractive. To date there has been no Council discussion about design standards and preservation - when obviously this is needed. Just saving the odd street or home under heritage designation will not alone protect Oak Bay’s character or desirability. This is especially true if these kinds of unrestricted developments, and now bare land strata subdivisions, are the order of the day.
Oak Bay Watch recognizes that other subdivisions exist in Oak Bay. However most are tasteful and proportionate to their surroundings. They are based on the traditional Fee Simple ownership concept. As such, they meet our subdivision bylaw rules and resident protections and therefore do not have ecological, geological, esthetic, or disruptive impacts. Other Councils have recognized that developers have discovered this loophole, which circumvents Zoning Bylaws and Community Plans and, have taken steps to protect their community. On the other hand, our Council has already ignored many of our District’s regulations and the public interest by approving the inappropriate Fair Street strata subdivision (Appendix 1). Now that they are indicating they intend to approve another, your property, street and neighbourhood could easily be next.
Please circulate this newsletter to your friends and neighbours.
*******Please help us continue to provide you with information about Community concerns and Council decisions and actions. Oak Bay Watch members also help community groups with their specific development concerns. Donate to Oak Bay Watch - even $5 or $10 dollars provides expenses for door- to- door handouts and helps us maintain our website. Oak Bay Watch is committed to ensuring the Community gets the full range of information on budget, governance and all key development issues – a well informed opinion cannot be made without this.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Oak Bay Watch would like to thank the Oak Bay Green Committee for their very generous substantial contribution – It, like all other donations, will be used to keep residents informed.
Please sign up for our newsletter – bottom of newsletter page.
Appendix 1 Background Information
Since 2010 Oak Bay Watch and members of the community have been trying to get our Zoning Bylaws back in line with the pre 2007 zoning provisions that determined, “if you want a big house you buy a big lot”. This sentiment was expressed by our recently departed Director of Building and Planning. For some reason his recent retirement received little fanfare? Major Jensen played a major role in the 2007 bylaw zoning change by convincing Council to approve it. It has resulted in today’s overbuilding that Council’s satisfaction survey found residents do not want.
The Community Association of Oak Bay recently organized a residents’ “Jane’s Walk” to show how many older homes are being demolished and to see the new houses which are being overbuilt and do not fit in to the surroundings or the streetscape. Although there has been an attempt to correct the Council’s admitted 2007 zoning mistake – it is obvious little has changed that led to the many resident complaints to Council in 2010. At the time the Director of Building and Planning explained to Council, “ There is an inconsistency in the (Zoning) Bylaw”. Mayor Jensen (then a Council member) was directed by Council to review this zoning problem and, although he may have reviewed the zoning mistake, his findings were never brought to Council or publicized.
Appendix 2 – Email to local resident from Department of Corporate Services
Date: June 9, 2017 at 4:01:13 PM PDT
Subject: FW: Development proposal for 237 King George Terrace
Greetings,
Thank you for your correspondence regarding 237 King George Terrace. In his absence, your email was forwarded to me for response.
A copy has been provided to our Manager of Planning, and it will also be included on the agenda when this item comes forward. As we have electronic agendas, your email address, residential address, and phone number will all be severed.
Given your interest and concerns, here is a high level overview of where the proposal is in the process.
- Currently, the application has not yet been considered by Council. As you have mentioned, public input is not received at the advisory committee level as it is important that Council receive that input directly. Some applications do not proceed past the committee level. If you would like to view the report considered at the Commission it is available on our website here: https://www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/meetings-minutes/minutes-agendas/advisory-planning-commission-19
- A report to Committee of the Whole will be forthcoming from our Planning Department on the proposal. It will include mention of the discussion at and recommendation from the Advisory Planning Commission, but will also include comment and analysis from staff. This report will then be considered by Council, sitting as Committee of the Whole, along with any correspondence received (such as you have provided). Committee of the Whole is a more informal setting which allows Council to hear from both the applicant and members of the public before it is considered at a formal Council meeting.
- Depending on the outcome of the Committee of the Whole, the application may then proceed to Council for final consideration. Correspondence would also be included on a Council agenda and there is a Public Participation period at the start of each meeting where those interested in speaking can provide comment to Council.
Our Committee of the Whole and Council agendas are included on our website as well here: https://www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/meetings-minutes/minutes-agendas. Agendas are posted on the Friday before a meeting. If you would like to sign up to receive email notifications, you can do so here: https://www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/contacts/subscriptions/council-agendas-minutes.
For your reference, we have two more Committee of the Whole meetings prior to summer break - on June 19 and on July 17. Before proceeding any further, the report would need to come first to one of these two meetings. Both meetings start at 7:00 PM and are held in Council Chambers at the Municipal Hall. As I mentioned above, you are welcome to attend and speak regarding your concerns.
I hope this information has been of help to you. If you have further questions regarding the process, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Deputy Director of Corporate Services
The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay
2167 Oak Bay Avenue
Victoria, BC V8R 1G2
For previous newsletters & Information visit oakbaywatch.com