Prince George city council asked city staff to prepare around 30 reports on potential amendments to the Official Community Plan at a special meeting on Wednesday, April 16 but has yet to approve any amendments.
That distinction is important because if council amends the OCP from the draft proposed by city staff at all, another public hearing will be required before third reading of the bylaw establishing the new plan can be considered.
Towards the end of the meeting, manager of legislative services Ethan Anderson said he believes another public hearing is likely at this point.
Compared to the two nights of the OCP public hearing held on March 19 and April 9, when the audience gallery was filled to the brim, just a dozen people came out for the April 16 meeting.
Instead of making amendments to the OCP, councillors asked staff to prepare reports on the options and consequences for changes they’re interested in proposing.
These reports are likely to be presented to council sometime in June.
Before council started raising motions, Coun. Trudy Klassen asked a couple of questions about the OCP. Klassen participated in the meeting remotely.
After some developers expressed concern before the first night of the OCP’s public hearing that they had not been consulted regarding their properties being removed from the Urban Containment Boundary in the revised plan, Klassen asked why some developers were consulted while others weren’t.
The city discourages increases to building density outside the Urban Containment Boundary.
Director of planning and development Deanna Wasnik said that as staff received land use inquiries relating to rezoning and the OCP last year, they would have been aware of proposed changes to the OCP.
Some developers were told that it would likely take less time if they waited for the OCP revision rather than pursue standalone amendments as the new plan was originally expected to be approved by the end of 2024.
With the revised OCP yet to be approved, Wasnik said these developers are now being told to pursue those standalone rezoning and OCP amendments based on the current edition of the plan.
Later in the meeting, Wasnik said the city’s records show that those developers were contacted about the proposed changes.
Klassen also asked whether the OCP adequately addresses brownfield development in the city. Wasnik said she needed more time to prepare a response and requested that council direct her to come back with the information at a future meeting.
The first councillor to start proposing motions was Klassen, who proposed that staff prepare a report on how to incorporate a multi-nodal growth strategy in the city.
Elaborating on her idea, she said the city is vast and has a bleak situation when it comes to infrastructure. To pay for future infrastructure, she said the city needs more people to live in a smaller area.
Many new residents don’t want to live downtown, and Klassen said a multi-nodal growth strategy would spread out new developments in different “town centres” across the city in places like the Hart, College Heights and Blackburn rather than concentrated in the city’s core, allowing for mixed-use zoning areas in those neighbourhoods.
“If we don’t do this, people who want single-detached homes on a larger lot will be forced to move into the Regional District (of Fraser-Fort George),” Klassen said, arguing that this would lead to a “donut” of development surrounding the city.
In response to a question from Coun. Garth Frizzell, Wasnik said much of what Klassen was looking for was already considered as part of a “complete community assessment” developed alongside the plan.
Wasnik said it would take a significant amount of staff time to prepare the information Klassen requested.
Klassen said she felt that the designated areas in the OCP for “neighbourhood centres and corridors” were too limited and that the Urban Containment Boundary was impinging on it. She said it was important to establish the city’s willingness to allow for the developing larger lots at this juncture.
Coun. Cori Ramsay said she felt that the OCP as proposed addresses development nodes appropriately and that she would have like Klassen to mention specific areas of concern.
Coun. Kyle Sampson said he was in favour of residents having amenities in their neighbourhoods and appreciated Klassen’s focus on the issue, but he also felt the plan addressed those needs sufficiently.
Coun. Ron Polillo said he thought Klassen was well-intentioned, but he also felt her concerns were already addressed though perhaps worded differently. He added that he disagreed with Klassen’s assertion that people are looking for larger lots.
Mayor Simon Yu, who was celebrating his birthday on the day of the meeting, said the Urban Containment Boundary might need to be enlarged to encourage the development of centres within the city but said it would take a lot of work to study that.
Responding to her colleagues’ comments, Klassen said the most severe example of what she was talking about was a lack of growth management around the airport and area residents would have to travel quite a distance for amenities as it gets built up.
The motion was defeated, with Coun. Brian Skakun, Yu and Klassen voting in favour.
Up next was a second motion from Klassen, who wanted staff to prepare a report clearly outlining the rationale for the borders of the Urban Containment Boundary, proposing a framework for periodic revision of the boundary, ensure the boundary isn’t interpreted as a strict binary between support and opposition for development and to conduct targeted engagement with stakeholders and landowners for better transparency going forward.
Ramsay asked for the engagement part of the motion to be voted on separately from the rest.
The first part of the motion was carried unanimously.
Ramsay proposed second part of the motion on public engagement to limit this engagement to five properties that came up during the public hearing: 505 Fourth Ave., 2913 Silvercrest Rd., 2000 Central St., Cranbrook Hill PID: 013-713-495 and 4729 Shamrock Road.
Both the amendment and the motion passed unanimously.
The next councillor to propose a motion was Coun. Tim Bennett, who wanted administration to prepare a report on changing Prince George’s designation in the OCP from a winter city to a year-round destination.
While being a winter city helped secure 2015 Canada Winter Games, Bennett said investments are happening for parks, venues and events that are creating the infrastructure for summer events. If we’re making those investments, Bennett said the city shouldn’t limit itself to being a winter destination.
Yu pointed out that the city has a snowflake on its flag and in its logo, asking whether we’d need to consider some iconography changes as well. Bennett said winter will always be an important aspect of the city, but Prince George has more to offer.
Ramsay agreed with Bennett, saying to only think of Prince George as a winter city would be a detriment.
This motion passed, with only Yu voting against.
Frizzell was next, proposing a motion asking administration to prepare a report on how wildfire safety can be enhanced in the city. It passed unanimously.
Back in the queue, Klassen proposed a motion directing staff to prepare a report on the potential consequences or options for the development of a city-wide infrastructure renewal strategy.
That would take a large amount of staff work, Wasnik said.
While she appreciates the direction Klassen was heading in, Ramsay said she didn’t think it was best suited for the OCP because of the financial implications. She said if it didn’t pass, it’s something the Standing Committee on Finance and Audit should look at.
Bennett suggested that the motion be changed to refer the matter to the committee, which Klassen said she was in favour of.
Skakun said it’ll be important to assess how much development cost charges will contribute to infrastructure expenses as part of that discussion.
The motion was passed as amended.
The second motion from Bennett asked administration to return a report on adding spaces promoting food security to the OCP. Some critics of the proposed OCP said during the public hearing that they felt like there wasn’t enough of a focus on food security.
Ramsay proposed an amendment wanting the report to reflect discouraging the planting of fruit trees when the owners don’t intend to harvest from them so make sure they don’t serve as bear attractants. She also asked that the report consider adding back in some food security policies that were removed from the previous edition of the OCP.
The amendment and motion were both carried unanimously.
The mayor commented after discussion on this item that it might be worth working with stakeholder groups to develop a food security charter for the city.
Skakun’s first motion was to request a report on the consequences of amending section 7.2.2 of the OCP to change a line saying that developers “shall” contribute to infrastructure to “must.” It passed unanimously.
His second motion asked for a report on amending one of the OCP’s objectives on climate change from “climate change mitigation measures reduce greenhouse gas emissions” to “climate change adaptation minimizes climate-related impacts on human safety, health and wellbeing.”
Only Klassen voted against this motion, saying she preferred the current language.
The third motion proposed by Skakun asked administration to report on the potential consequences of removing Moore’s Meadow in its entirety from the Urban Containment Boundary. It passed, with only Ramsay opposed.
Ramsay’s first motion asked for a report on amending section 18.7(e) to add the words “and in underserved areas” after the words “growth priority areas.” It passed unanimously.
Returning to the speaker’s chair, Klassen put forward another motion asking for administration to prepare a report on developing policies and criteria for “strategic exceptions” to the Urban Containment Boundary, requiring individual neighbourhood plans for each proposal and to map potential future urban reserve areas. It passed.
Her next motion requested a report on options to amend the OCP to recognize Prince George as a “polycentric city with multiple district neighbourhoods,” establishing neighbourhood-level data for decision-making purposes and broadening policies to allow for a diverse range of housing options.
These were originally separate motions that Klassen asked to be considered together. The motion passed by a margin of five to four, with Ramsay, Coun. Ron Polillo, Coun. Susan Scott and Sampson opposed.
Following up on that, Klassen asked for a report on the options for creating a plain-language summary and visual guide to accompany the OCP, ensuring that the OCP spells out that the OCP is a planning tool and not a set of rigid development limits and to create an interactive digital version of the OCP.
Bennett proposed an amendment to have these matters incorporated into the city’s corporate workplan rather than have a report prepared.
The amendment passed, with Polillo, Sampson and Scott opposed. The main motion passed with Polillo and Sampson opposed.
Bennett then proposed a motion asking staff to prepare a report on the options for added access to public washrooms where possible to section 14 of the OCP. It passed unanimously.
The first motion proposed by Sampson directed administration to include language in section 16.1.4 of the OCP to support and protect the urban tree canopy and the equitable replacement of trees due to development on both public and private land.
This would be a medium- to large-size project for staff, Wasnik said, and a similar project is already on the corporate workplan. It passed unanimously.
Up next, Sampson proposed a motion directing administration to add policy language in section 9.1.6 of the OCP to support the “growth of local innovation and creative sector developments” in the city, including start-ups, clean tech, entrepreneurial work and more.
A friendly amendment was made to add language reflecting Prince George’s status as a college and university centre. The motion carried unanimously.
Bennett brought forward a motion calling for administration to prepare a report about creating a strategy for Prince George to host large regional, provincial, national and international events. It passed unanimously.
During the public hearings on the OCP, the Prince George Airport Authority expressed concern that its role in land use decisions around the airport were not acknowledged in the OCP.
Klassen raised a motion addressing those concerns. Ramsay said another motion proposed after the April 9 public hearing had concluded had already addressed those concerns by asking for a report on returning the language on the airport how it was written in the last version of the OCP.
In response, Klassen said the text of her motion came directly from an email sent by the authority. Klassen’s motion passed with Ramsay, Polillo and Frizzell voting against it.
Subsequently, Klassen’s next motion asked for a report on amending the OCP to include the development of a ring road around the city in consultation with Lheidli T’enneh First Nation and the BC Ministry of Transportation.
Ramsay said she thought the city should talk about the issue with the Ministry of Transportation before embedding it in the OCP as highways are not a responsibility of municipalities.
It was defeated with Ramsay, Polillo, Scott, Bennett and Sampson voting against.
After that, Ramsay asked for a report on amending section 19.1.3(a) of the OCP to add a business diversification snapshot from Statistics Canada as an indicator under goal four. Frizzell offered a friendly amendment to add the BC vital statistics estimates index as an indicator under goal one. Both the amendment and motion passed unanimously.
Also passed was a motion calling for a report on adding a specific definition for the terms “land use designation” and “zoning” to the OCP. It passed unanimously.
Klassen put forward another motion asking for section nine of the OCP, focusing on economic development, to be amended to include discussion of Prince George as gateway to the north, Asia and the Americas, supporting forestry, energy development, realizing Prince George Airport as an Asia-Pacific intermodal trade hub and adopting a “growth attitude” for the city.
This motion was passed, with only Polillo opposing it.
Turning her gaze to section 10, on arts, culture and heritage, Klassen asked for a report on amending it to include “bold, aspirational wording to inspire a thriving cultural vision”, addressing the need for larger cultural event venues and developing a cultural plan that includes heritage, agricultural and horsemanship.
Director of civic facilities Andy Beesley said his department is already working on similar cultural vision items on its workplan this year.
This motion was defeated by a margin of five to four.
Sampson was up next, proposing a motion asking for a report on adding aging in place policies regarding neighbourhood planning and housing design. It passed unanimously.
Continuing, Sampson asked for a report on adding Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles to policy language in the OCP. It also passed unanimously.
For his third motion in a row, Sampson asked for a report on including policy language in section 9.1.4 on the re-use and redevelopment of underutilized municipal assets. Again, it was passed unanimously.
Up again, Klassen asked for a report on amending the OCP to include collaboration between the city and post-secondary institutions.
She said she’s heard from representatives from both the College of New Caledonia and the University of Northern BC that they wished the city had partnered with the institution on various projects.
Frizzell said he was going to recuse himself from the discussion over this motion as he’s an instructor at both local post-secondary institutions and a member of CNC’s board of directors.
With Frizzell absent from the vote, there was a tie vote which meant the motion was defeated.
Klassen then requested a report on changing every instance of the word “may” in the OCP to “shall.”
“I want us to have certainty, I want us to know what everything means,” Klassen said.
City manager Walter Babicz said there are 48 instances of the world “may” in the draft OCP. He said the use of that word allows the city more flexibility, though Klassen argued that it contributed to uncertainty by residents and developers.
This motion was not seconded and was therefore defeated.
Following that, Klassen asked for a report on embedding meaningful consultation with Lheidli T’enneh First Nation into the OCP.
Ramsay said the Union of BC Municipalities is wading through issues relating to the Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples and suggested it might be a good idea to table Klassen’s motion until the next revision of the OCP is due in 2028 so that some issues can get worked out.
Bennett said it would be better to ask Lheidli T’enneh whether they want this included in the OCP before deciding to include them without asking first. The mayor said he would bring up the item at the next government-to-government meeting with Lheidli T’enneh.
The motion was ultimately deferred until 2028.
Ramsay brought up issues with the Carter light industrial area, saying that she has concerns with proposed businesses like bookstores and physiotherapist practices getting denied or forced to get a temporary use permit despite servicing an area that could use them.
She proposed a motion asking for a report on the implications of diversifying land use within that area.
While she acknowledged the need to rethink the neighbourhood, Klassen said she’s heard from businesses that there’s a lack of industrial lands in the city. The motion passed unanimously.
The final motion proposed by Klassen asked for a report on developing a more aspirational vision statement for Prince George in the plan as the one in the draft OCP was created before the political upheaval created by the second Trump Administration.
The draft statement was developed based on consultation with residents, Ramsay said, suggesting it should instead be referred to the next revision of the OCP.
“I don’t want to overwrite the community’s work on the current vision,” Ramsay said.
Before the meeting adjourned, the mayor proposed his only motion of the night.
Yu said the light industrial area east of Queensway has never really been used for that purpose, proposing a report be prepared on changing the area’s future land use from light industrial to “transition.”
It passed unanimously.
Before the meeting started, a man went around with a sheet of stickers saying “I’m a tree hugger” on them. He offered them to other attendees, asking if they wanted to wear one to prove that they’re not a cop.
After the second night of the public hearing on the OCP, city administration confirmed that there had been plainclothes police officers in the audience after staff had expressed that they felt unsafe during the hearing’s first night.
Because of the Easter long weekend and the April 28 federal election, the next regular meeting of city council is scheduled for Wednesday, April 23 at 6 p.m. Look for coverage of the meeting either on princegeorgecitizen.com or in the May 1 print edition.
