Newsletter – November 15, 2019: Direction and Immediate Action Required
There is no doubt that the last Council left the District with many problems and extraordinary challenges. During the election campaign all candidates for Mayor and Council recognized that changes were needed. The question is: “After the new Council’s first year in office what progress has been made?”
The Issues and Problems that Residents and Council members have identified:
The Municipal Staff, however, have determined that these problems and issues should be addressed by providing the following Strategic Priorities and Corporate Goals:
It is obvious there is disconnect between Resident’s and Council’s priorities and expectations and the Staff’s Strategic Priorities and Corporate Goals. Staff appear to be unable to address specific issues or are unwilling to, where results would be measurable.
The Staff’s Strategic Priorities and Corporate Goals will do little to address the serious problems the community is facing. All but the last of the staff-selected prioritized goals are inherent part of their jobs and expected performance. Presumably the lack of measurability/accountability is why the District is continually adding more and more Administrative Staff.
For example, the “Provide Service Excellence” priority goal, raises the question: “If this a priority goal, should residents be expecting mediocre or deficient service delivery?”
“Demonstrate Leadership in Fostering Community Health and Resilience” If this is a priority goal, does this mean leadership isn’t being demonstrated now and the quality of life isn’t being enhanced?
The “Housing Option” priority goal also raises many questions. Why was secondary suite housing the only option singled-out by the Planning Department? There are many housing options for Council and the Community to consider (see Appendix #1 ) most with far less impact on the Community and District’s Infrastructure (“in it’s latter years of service” – OCP page 143).
Notwithstanding Council’s priorities and Community impacts, the Planning Department has put the “Secondary Suite Housing Option” ahead of providing the results of the Housing Needs Study and a public secondary suite consultation process and full disclosure of the impacts and required administration and enforcement expenditures. Promoting a secondary suite regulation change and prematurely spending well over $100,000 that is desperately needed for more important purposes, would not be considered a good planning practice.
Has the Planning Department not recognized what the Community has been very clear about in: the OCP Findings Report; the three October/ November Council COW Open House meetings and in several surveys, and that is the present secondary system is adequate. Changing the present District’s secondary suite regulations to add: more administration and enforcement costs; many more non-revenue tenants; more traffic/ less parking and many other negative impacts is not acceptable. Some current council members have pointed this out as well as many residents.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective
Isn’t the Staff’s “ Enhance Sense of Place” priority goal already covered. Oak Bay is a very highly ranked Canadian community: isn’t this why people want to move here and developers want to develop here and maximize their profits.
“Achieve Sustainable Service Delivery” is the primary reason why most residents do not want to trade the current controlled secondary suite system for an uncontrolled and unpredictable alternative. Oak Bay residents do not want to experience the struggles other Communities currently face with the many negative, unsolved suite impacts/ challenges.
Changing the regulations for secondary suites for safety reasons and code violations have been identified as primary goals. Why has this not been accomplished under the present suite enforcement system? What has been keeping the Planning Department and Advisory Planning Commission from recommending it? Adding more unregistered suites with stoves and increasing the number of tenants per suite under new zoning regulations, will only intensify the safety issue, not reduce it. New suite regulations will make enforcement more difficult, time consuming and expensive.
We are not enamored with the new Corporate Plan. Much of its content and initiatives were already available in previous Strategic Initiative Plans. The new Corporate Plan also repeats the Staff’s five vague Strategic Priorities and Corporate goals above on every page – however, they are now misidentified as Council priorities. The Corporate Plan is mainly an account of the functions usually carried out by a municipal staff and falls woefully short of identifying performance and progress information. Some Council members, this term and last, requested that a strategic plan identify a detailed quarterly account of staff performance and what progress has been made on priority items. Now that there is a Director of Strategic Initiatives, another newly created position, this should not be too much to ask.
However, what is desperately needed is a sequential “first things first” Plan that prioritizes:
Specific and well-thought-out priority goals lead to more performance improvement and reporting and much better outcomes than easy, vague or general goals.
*******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.
Keep informed please sign up for our “based on facts” newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
_______________________________________________________________
Appendix #1
Page 79 of the Official Community Plan:
“Infill Residential - H12.
Consider different forms of infill housing in areas designated as Established Neighbourhoodson Schedule B, including subdivision of larger lots, duplexes, triplexes, laneway houses, and garden suites. Prior to considering infill housing, the District will need to develop criteria and guidelines with which to review proposals and evaluate their contextual fit, in consultation with the public.
"Contextual fit" defined as: related to the implementation of evidence-based interventions: “the match between the strategies, procedures, or elements of an intervention and the values, needs, skills, and resources of those who implement and those who experience the intervention… The contextual fit of an intervention for a specific setting is local”.
Appendix #2
At Council on Jan 28 19 an Oak Bay resident, asked: “how the 77 new houses listed on the Quarterly Report of Active Land Use Applications will impact the urban forest. He said that trees located within the building envelope can be removed without discriminating between young and mature trees or between species. He said tree retention should be encouraged regardless of whether variances are required to facilitate construction. He requested that Council consider designating trees as a community amenity and that they be considered as a community contribution”.
The planet’s forests continue to disappear at an alarming rate and urban trees removed to make way for new development.
There is no doubt that the last Council left the District with many problems and extraordinary challenges. During the election campaign all candidates for Mayor and Council recognized that changes were needed. The question is: “After the new Council’s first year in office what progress has been made?”
The Issues and Problems that Residents and Council members have identified:
- Zoning: demolition and building to the maximum on small lots.
- Destruction of trees – current practices will not preserve the Urban Forest.
- Transparency, full disclosure and public engagement deficiencies.
- Inadequate infrastructure reserves vs large deferred maintenance liabilities.
- Necessary Planning Department policy and guidelines are long overdue.
- Weak financial controls are causing excessive property tax increases.
The Municipal Staff, however, have determined that these problems and issues should be addressed by providing the following Strategic Priorities and Corporate Goals:
- Demonstrate Leadership in Fostering Community Health and Resilience
- Enhance and Promote Quality of Life and Sense of Place
- Achieve Sustainable Service Delivery
- Provide Service Excellence
- Ensure Access to Diverse Housing Options Within the Built Environment
It is obvious there is disconnect between Resident’s and Council’s priorities and expectations and the Staff’s Strategic Priorities and Corporate Goals. Staff appear to be unable to address specific issues or are unwilling to, where results would be measurable.
The Staff’s Strategic Priorities and Corporate Goals will do little to address the serious problems the community is facing. All but the last of the staff-selected prioritized goals are inherent part of their jobs and expected performance. Presumably the lack of measurability/accountability is why the District is continually adding more and more Administrative Staff.
For example, the “Provide Service Excellence” priority goal, raises the question: “If this a priority goal, should residents be expecting mediocre or deficient service delivery?”
“Demonstrate Leadership in Fostering Community Health and Resilience” If this is a priority goal, does this mean leadership isn’t being demonstrated now and the quality of life isn’t being enhanced?
The “Housing Option” priority goal also raises many questions. Why was secondary suite housing the only option singled-out by the Planning Department? There are many housing options for Council and the Community to consider (see Appendix #1 ) most with far less impact on the Community and District’s Infrastructure (“in it’s latter years of service” – OCP page 143).
Notwithstanding Council’s priorities and Community impacts, the Planning Department has put the “Secondary Suite Housing Option” ahead of providing the results of the Housing Needs Study and a public secondary suite consultation process and full disclosure of the impacts and required administration and enforcement expenditures. Promoting a secondary suite regulation change and prematurely spending well over $100,000 that is desperately needed for more important purposes, would not be considered a good planning practice.
Has the Planning Department not recognized what the Community has been very clear about in: the OCP Findings Report; the three October/ November Council COW Open House meetings and in several surveys, and that is the present secondary system is adequate. Changing the present District’s secondary suite regulations to add: more administration and enforcement costs; many more non-revenue tenants; more traffic/ less parking and many other negative impacts is not acceptable. Some current council members have pointed this out as well as many residents.
Oak Bay Watch Perspective
Isn’t the Staff’s “ Enhance Sense of Place” priority goal already covered. Oak Bay is a very highly ranked Canadian community: isn’t this why people want to move here and developers want to develop here and maximize their profits.
“Achieve Sustainable Service Delivery” is the primary reason why most residents do not want to trade the current controlled secondary suite system for an uncontrolled and unpredictable alternative. Oak Bay residents do not want to experience the struggles other Communities currently face with the many negative, unsolved suite impacts/ challenges.
Changing the regulations for secondary suites for safety reasons and code violations have been identified as primary goals. Why has this not been accomplished under the present suite enforcement system? What has been keeping the Planning Department and Advisory Planning Commission from recommending it? Adding more unregistered suites with stoves and increasing the number of tenants per suite under new zoning regulations, will only intensify the safety issue, not reduce it. New suite regulations will make enforcement more difficult, time consuming and expensive.
We are not enamored with the new Corporate Plan. Much of its content and initiatives were already available in previous Strategic Initiative Plans. The new Corporate Plan also repeats the Staff’s five vague Strategic Priorities and Corporate goals above on every page – however, they are now misidentified as Council priorities. The Corporate Plan is mainly an account of the functions usually carried out by a municipal staff and falls woefully short of identifying performance and progress information. Some Council members, this term and last, requested that a strategic plan identify a detailed quarterly account of staff performance and what progress has been made on priority items. Now that there is a Director of Strategic Initiatives, another newly created position, this should not be too much to ask.
However, what is desperately needed is a sequential “first things first” Plan that prioritizes:
- Zoning reform, currently scheduled for 2022- 2023 (so much for including residents in the decision making process)
- Expediting policy and guidelines for the Planning Department regarding the zoning approval process and development transparency
- Redirecting less important expenditures to infrastructure and amenity upgrading.
- Sensible tree (as an asset) conservation (see Appendix #2)
- Much better control over spending practices
- Some level of competent environmental oversight
- Full transparency disclosure, and most of all, balancing developer and private property rights and interests with the general Community’s rights and interests.
Specific and well-thought-out priority goals lead to more performance improvement and reporting and much better outcomes than easy, vague or general goals.
*******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.
Keep informed please sign up for our “based on facts” newsletter – bottom of Newsletter Menu Item.
_______________________________________________________________
Appendix #1
Page 79 of the Official Community Plan:
“Infill Residential - H12.
Consider different forms of infill housing in areas designated as Established Neighbourhoodson Schedule B, including subdivision of larger lots, duplexes, triplexes, laneway houses, and garden suites. Prior to considering infill housing, the District will need to develop criteria and guidelines with which to review proposals and evaluate their contextual fit, in consultation with the public.
"Contextual fit" defined as: related to the implementation of evidence-based interventions: “the match between the strategies, procedures, or elements of an intervention and the values, needs, skills, and resources of those who implement and those who experience the intervention… The contextual fit of an intervention for a specific setting is local”.
Appendix #2
At Council on Jan 28 19 an Oak Bay resident, asked: “how the 77 new houses listed on the Quarterly Report of Active Land Use Applications will impact the urban forest. He said that trees located within the building envelope can be removed without discriminating between young and mature trees or between species. He said tree retention should be encouraged regardless of whether variances are required to facilitate construction. He requested that Council consider designating trees as a community amenity and that they be considered as a community contribution”.
The planet’s forests continue to disappear at an alarming rate and urban trees removed to make way for new development.