Mayday! Mayday! Mayday! Continuing to Make Bad Decisions is Inexcusable!
Bad decisions are bad decisions no matter which Council and Administration is making them. Unfortunately, the “Mess” the last Council members, who are no longer with us, created, appear to be in no danger of being corrected any time soon. The ”Mess” includes out of control tax increases; failure to apply tax- reducing development cost charges; neglected failing Infrastructure; no environmental over-sight; no strengthened tree bylaw; no needed shoreline development area protection and of course, the uncorrected zoning that impacts many of the above listed District problems.
Out of the gate, the new Council has not prevented the Planning Department from moving forward and spending a significant amount of staff time and money on an intensive pro Basement Suite initiative and has approved $50,000 for a “Housing Needs Study”. This is notwithstanding the Council majority’s election campaign platforms to develop a comprehensive Housing Strategy in an orderly way. So what is wrong with this – a lot.
In the event Council has not noticed:
A good capacity-deficit analogy is: If your current home or business plumbing and electrical systems were inadequate – would it be wise to add a couple of bathrooms or a new kitchen before correcting your capacity issue? This however is exactly what is being proposed. So far Council’s response has been we recognize the problems and we are going to fix them - we are a new Council and have set priorities.
The reality is that much of what requires fixing is the responsibility of the Planning Department who are spending a lot of time and funding (including an expensive Consultant Company Contract) on Infill and Secondary Suite reports and actions. So far this has involved a survey, and a one-sided, pro-suite public engagement promotional presentation. Additionally the Planning Department is spending time on poorly negotiated complex developments, a number rejected by resident protests and Council, making it obvious just how flawed and inappropriate their support and bargaining is for these developments.
A current Councillor is leading the basement suite charge and this includes appearing to speak for Council in the press with non-verifiable information. Council’s excuse is they cannot stop the basement suite resolution because it was approved by a single vote, near the end of the term of the outgoing (majority vote) pro-suite Council.
SO WHAT? Shouldn’t common sense and the PUBLIC INTEREST come first. Why didn’t Council stop the train before it left the station? Right now there are so many better uses for the $50,000 and a very lucrative expense contract. For example, currently the District is woefully short of tax dollars – an expected and unprecedented 8.3% tax increase highlights and emphasizes this. There is no doubt a suite land-use zoning change will add to this tax burden.
There have been many Council resolutions and Consultant reports still sitting on the shelf. The Province has decreed that there is no rush to complete a Housing Needs Study. The BC Union of Municipalities published a “Comprehensive Housing Strategy as recently as 2018. It covered recommendations for the Province to allow municipalities to tax Secondary Suites; the inability of any municipality to control Airbnb; the role that speculation, tax evasion and off shore marketing has played in BC etc.
Wouldn’t it be wise to wait until some of this correctional legislation is implemented and proven effective? Wouldn’t it be wise to wait until our expenses are under control and infrastructure capacity is in place before densifying to the extent contemplated with more suites and infill?
The Provincial Secondary Suite Guidelines provide many examples of the negative, unsolved secondary suite impacts that municipalities throughout BC are struggling with. The Guidelines report, “Suite programs can also be difficult to monitor and enforce thus creating higher administrative costs and increased liability” and “Some (small) jurisdictions may see the cost of bylaw enforcement as a stumbling block.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective
(read on for much more Information)
We believe Mayor Murdoch is sincere in his key election pledge (Times-Colonist October 28, 2018) “to rebuild Oak Bay’s infrastructure” and to address the many unimplemented priority items Council has inherited and identified that require staff’s immediate attention.
We note the Mayor has stated three times publicly that secondary suite regulation is only a small part of a housing needs continuum: however, we fail to understand why the Planning Department has been permitted to select, prioritize and use so many resources on its Secondary Suite initiative. An initiative that, when introduced at this point, will severely impact most of the problems Council has committed to address.
We note that a Planning Department/ Consultant, Secondary Suite Promotional Presentation on April 25, 2018 (billed as a resident open house meeting) failed to provide the public with the many negative impact information explained by the BC Union of Municipalities and the BC Secondary Suite Guidelines. The bias was clear. Could this be another expensive public engagement "going through the paces" exercise with the decision already predetermined?
The BC Secondary Suite Guidelines Best Practices specifically state, “Provide clear information materials. Information materials on secondary suites, such as fact sheets and guidelines, should clearly state the information needed by homeowners and other interested parties”. The Planning Department has not provided the information explaining the disadvantages of changing the Zoning Bylaw for such a significant densification, land use change.
The hallmark of Oak Bay’s character is its 60% single-family neighbourhoods with ample trees. proportionate sized homes and well-kept gardens. These are already under threat. The current uncorrected zoning bylaw permits the loss of so much garden space. This is because excessive density is allowed through over-building, exemptions, minimum setbacks, variances, excess paving and tree destruction.
The Planning Department’s reports and actions indicate it favours adding much more density by turning all of Oak Bay into a two-family zone. And this before the zoning and taxes are under control and the infrastructure has been corrected.
Additionally the Planning Department also failed to:
What is also difficult to understand is that three current Council Members who voted against the, last-minute Secondary Suite Resolution, the Terms of Reference and expensive Consultant Contract have not taken any action to prevent what currently is a total waste of tax dollars and staff time. Staff time that could used to expedite: a tax-reducing, development cost charge schedule; recommendations to fix the broken zoning bylaw: providing a shoreline development permit area protection report; recommending to Council how to reintroduce environmental protections, and developing a “comprehensive” housing strategy.
It seems to us:
that the new Council and Planning Department are running in opposite directions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*******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 share our Newlettersl with your friends.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed please sign up for our “based on facts” newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
Bad decisions are bad decisions no matter which Council and Administration is making them. Unfortunately, the “Mess” the last Council members, who are no longer with us, created, appear to be in no danger of being corrected any time soon. The ”Mess” includes out of control tax increases; failure to apply tax- reducing development cost charges; neglected failing Infrastructure; no environmental over-sight; no strengthened tree bylaw; no needed shoreline development area protection and of course, the uncorrected zoning that impacts many of the above listed District problems.
Out of the gate, the new Council has not prevented the Planning Department from moving forward and spending a significant amount of staff time and money on an intensive pro Basement Suite initiative and has approved $50,000 for a “Housing Needs Study”. This is notwithstanding the Council majority’s election campaign platforms to develop a comprehensive Housing Strategy in an orderly way. So what is wrong with this – a lot.
In the event Council has not noticed:
- At this time there is not the infrastructure capacity or funding required to support adding what will surely be more unregistered, untaxed suites.
- A Housing Needs Study (HNS), should follow a Comprehensive Housing Strategy that residents and the Official Community Plan have been clamouring for since 2014. A HNS is only a small part of an overall housing plan that would include accurate local data and demographic projections, airbnb restrictions, effective growth controls and targets etc. Housing needs can only be determined with this comprehensive information. The Province has recognized this, allowing 3 years for the supplementary Housing Needs Study to be completed.
A good capacity-deficit analogy is: If your current home or business plumbing and electrical systems were inadequate – would it be wise to add a couple of bathrooms or a new kitchen before correcting your capacity issue? This however is exactly what is being proposed. So far Council’s response has been we recognize the problems and we are going to fix them - we are a new Council and have set priorities.
The reality is that much of what requires fixing is the responsibility of the Planning Department who are spending a lot of time and funding (including an expensive Consultant Company Contract) on Infill and Secondary Suite reports and actions. So far this has involved a survey, and a one-sided, pro-suite public engagement promotional presentation. Additionally the Planning Department is spending time on poorly negotiated complex developments, a number rejected by resident protests and Council, making it obvious just how flawed and inappropriate their support and bargaining is for these developments.
A current Councillor is leading the basement suite charge and this includes appearing to speak for Council in the press with non-verifiable information. Council’s excuse is they cannot stop the basement suite resolution because it was approved by a single vote, near the end of the term of the outgoing (majority vote) pro-suite Council.
SO WHAT? Shouldn’t common sense and the PUBLIC INTEREST come first. Why didn’t Council stop the train before it left the station? Right now there are so many better uses for the $50,000 and a very lucrative expense contract. For example, currently the District is woefully short of tax dollars – an expected and unprecedented 8.3% tax increase highlights and emphasizes this. There is no doubt a suite land-use zoning change will add to this tax burden.
There have been many Council resolutions and Consultant reports still sitting on the shelf. The Province has decreed that there is no rush to complete a Housing Needs Study. The BC Union of Municipalities published a “Comprehensive Housing Strategy as recently as 2018. It covered recommendations for the Province to allow municipalities to tax Secondary Suites; the inability of any municipality to control Airbnb; the role that speculation, tax evasion and off shore marketing has played in BC etc.
Wouldn’t it be wise to wait until some of this correctional legislation is implemented and proven effective? Wouldn’t it be wise to wait until our expenses are under control and infrastructure capacity is in place before densifying to the extent contemplated with more suites and infill?
The Provincial Secondary Suite Guidelines provide many examples of the negative, unsolved secondary suite impacts that municipalities throughout BC are struggling with. The Guidelines report, “Suite programs can also be difficult to monitor and enforce thus creating higher administrative costs and increased liability” and “Some (small) jurisdictions may see the cost of bylaw enforcement as a stumbling block.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective
(read on for much more Information)
We believe Mayor Murdoch is sincere in his key election pledge (Times-Colonist October 28, 2018) “to rebuild Oak Bay’s infrastructure” and to address the many unimplemented priority items Council has inherited and identified that require staff’s immediate attention.
We note the Mayor has stated three times publicly that secondary suite regulation is only a small part of a housing needs continuum: however, we fail to understand why the Planning Department has been permitted to select, prioritize and use so many resources on its Secondary Suite initiative. An initiative that, when introduced at this point, will severely impact most of the problems Council has committed to address.
We note that a Planning Department/ Consultant, Secondary Suite Promotional Presentation on April 25, 2018 (billed as a resident open house meeting) failed to provide the public with the many negative impact information explained by the BC Union of Municipalities and the BC Secondary Suite Guidelines. The bias was clear. Could this be another expensive public engagement "going through the paces" exercise with the decision already predetermined?
The BC Secondary Suite Guidelines Best Practices specifically state, “Provide clear information materials. Information materials on secondary suites, such as fact sheets and guidelines, should clearly state the information needed by homeowners and other interested parties”. The Planning Department has not provided the information explaining the disadvantages of changing the Zoning Bylaw for such a significant densification, land use change.
The hallmark of Oak Bay’s character is its 60% single-family neighbourhoods with ample trees. proportionate sized homes and well-kept gardens. These are already under threat. The current uncorrected zoning bylaw permits the loss of so much garden space. This is because excessive density is allowed through over-building, exemptions, minimum setbacks, variances, excess paving and tree destruction.
The Planning Department’s reports and actions indicate it favours adding much more density by turning all of Oak Bay into a two-family zone. And this before the zoning and taxes are under control and the infrastructure has been corrected.
Additionally the Planning Department also failed to:
- Explain to residents the current bylaw that allows suites is working adequately.
- Provide a statistical enforcement report from the Bylaw Officer.
- Provide the public with a tax dollar analysis of changing zoning to remove the current suite safety condition and 2 tenant restriction.
- Explain that a suite bylaw change will result in very few new registrations.
What is also difficult to understand is that three current Council Members who voted against the, last-minute Secondary Suite Resolution, the Terms of Reference and expensive Consultant Contract have not taken any action to prevent what currently is a total waste of tax dollars and staff time. Staff time that could used to expedite: a tax-reducing, development cost charge schedule; recommendations to fix the broken zoning bylaw: providing a shoreline development permit area protection report; recommending to Council how to reintroduce environmental protections, and developing a “comprehensive” housing strategy.
It seems to us:
- given the above priorities that Council and many residents have indicated require immediate attention and,
- the Planning Department’s wasting tax dollars and their valuable time to pull resources away from these priorities
that the new Council and Planning Department are running in opposite directions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
*******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 share our Newlettersl with your friends.
(Please use Donate Button at bottom of oakbaywatch.com Home Page)
Keep informed please sign up for our “based on facts” newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.