Prince George city council directed city staff to prepare reports on potential amendments to the Official Community Plan though did not adopt any changes following the second night of the public hearing on the plan.
A special council meeting to continue discussion was scheduled for Wednesday, April 16 starting at 5 p.m.
Though the parking spaces around city hall were choked with cars, turnout for the second night of the hearing wasn’t the same standing-room-only crowd as the first — the Prince George Spruce Kings were playing Game 4 of their playoff series against the Chilliwack Chiefs next door at the Kopar Memorial Arena, after all.
The meeting stretched four hours, longer than the first night of the public hearing on March 19 when council decided to suspend proceedings and reconvene later after three and a half of comments from residents and developers.
At the beginning of the night, manager of legislative services Ethan Anderson explained that those who hadn’t spoken at the hearing’s first night were given priority and allowed 10 minutes to give their thoughts.
Those who had already spoken were allowed to take up the microphone after the first-timers and given an initial five minutes.
First up was April Ottesen, who said that while the OCP isn’t a prescriptive tool, it allows the community to list its intents and desires.
She said that the revised OCP does not include enough focus on the creation of a robust local food system compared to the previous iteration, asking that policies regarding food production and farmers markets be added.
Cameron Beck was next. He agreed with the previous comments regarding food security and saluted those who advocated for greater environmental protections during the hearing’s first night.
He said the call to action regarding food security in the 2012 version of the OCP was true then and it has only grown in the years since. In the intervening years, he said there have been rude awakenings to the fragility of our food supply, like during wildfires in the Williams Lake area closing Highway 97 in 2017 and the COVID-19 pandemic.
Jennifer Côté said Ginter’s Meadow contains a wide variety of edible and medicinal plants. She said earlier this year, she received a lot of requests to teach locals about what could be harvested in the area at a time when fruits and vegetables were scarce on store shelves.
She said Prince George once had a high moose population, but it decreased due to urban sprawl. That sprawl, she said, has also led to the city’s inability to maintain its existing infrastructure and requires it to raise taxes unsustainably.
Shirley Birkenshaw said she’s lived near Ginter’s Green since it was a game trail and has watched it become the “heart of the city over the years.”
She said the area is “bursting at the seams” on weekends and called for not only it to be protected but for other parts of the escarpment along the bottom of Cranbrook Hill to be added to it.
Nicole Fraser introduced herself as a planner, saying that the plan seems to lack benchmarks that would help determine whether it is a success.
She said that when council makes decisions, it seems like it rarely refers back to the Official Community Plan, which goes against its purpose.
She said Prince George is different from higher-density urban centres with spread out population areas and its land uses can’t be managed in the same way.
The Urban Containment Boundary, she said, seems to be rigid and there’s little explanation of why it has been set up as presented in the draft plan. She said it neither seems to be serving developers nor those looking for environmental protections.
At the first night of the public hearing, some developers complained that their properties had been moved outside of the Urban Containment Boundary, meaning they would have to go through public hearings to build on them. No developers spoke on the second hearing.
Others expressed concern that the boundary was too broad and would facilitate urban sprawl.
Kim Saliken said that while she lives outside of city limits, she is a frequent user of Ginter’s Green. She expressed disappointment at the lack of protections for that area and discussed the importance of green spaces like it.
Encroachment on natural spaces, she said is short-sighted because many locals rely on those areas for recreation and it could create problems with humans interacting more frequently with wildlife.
Saransh Tiku said he and his wife have lived in much more populated cities. He said housing developments represented in the city and in the place do not line up with housing demands.
Tiku said locals see apartments as transitional, not long-term homes, and that they much prefer single-detached dwellings. He said the plan doesn’t match the local reality of cold winters.
The OCP, he said, seems like a “one size fits all” planning minutes that could have been taken whole cloth from cities in the Lower Mainland and doesn’t line up with the reality of our cold winters.
“It’s not just tone-deaf, it’s frankly ridiculous,” he said. At one point, he wondered aloud if someone was sniffing glue when developing some aspects of the plan.
After his comments, Coun. Cori Ramsay raised a point of order to ask that speakers don’t question the work.
Jaspreet Bhatia said he was speaking as a dog owner and asked for Ginter’s Green to be protected. He said those trails and those around UNBC offer a unique experience for residents to connect with nature.
These elements, he said, attracts students and residents like himself to this city. If Ginter’s is lost, he said it would lead to an identity crisis.
“I’m not here to oppose progress,” Bhatia said. “I’m here to propose responsible progress.”
Amelia Merrick said she last spoke to council four years ago, about housing. She offered councillors congratulations, saying she felt like real progress had been made since then and was glad to see that the OCP complies with provincial legislation on small-scale, multi-unit housing.
She said she felt there were improvements in the plan regarding partnerships with Indigenous governments and groups, and to advance truth and reconciliation. Her request to council was to add references to community gardens in the OCP and to include a greater emphasis to deal with vacant and derelict buildings in the community.
Alexii Saliken said the city’s supply of third spaces — those outside of residences or workplaces — is dwindling.
That finished the list of first-time speakers.
UNBC professor Annie Booth, a registered city planner, said she wanted to re-emphasize that city staff and council have a fiduciary duty to make sure the OCP reflects the desires of the community and she doesn’t think the draft plan does so.
She spoke about the need to make sure that Prince George isn’t a "doughnut" with dense outlying areas and a hollow core and the need to have the plan follow solid planning concepts and guidelines.
Kevin Cunin reiterated his call for support for the Prince George Western Heritage Society, saying it needs a new large, covered grandstand at which to hold events.
Selene Maxwell acknowledged the work done to create the updated OCP and council’s willingness to listen to residents’ comments.
She said Ginter’s Green was the first green space she visited after moving to Prince George, calling it the heart of the city. Maxwell emphasized the benefits to residents of access to natural spaces and criticized a desire to develop on them to maximize the city’s tax base.
New developments in previously undeveloped areas put a burden on the residents to cover the cost of building new infrastructure up to the property line, Maxwell said, which will exacerbate residents’ already high tax burden.
Maxwell brought up the four calls to action made by the advocacy Ginter’s Green Forever: remove the right-of-way land use plan along the Cranbrook Hill escarpment, to remove a property near Ginter’s from the Urban Containment Boundary, protect Forests for the World and the surrounding greenway and to protect Moore’s Meadow by removing part of it from the boundary and re-zone another part to park land.
Kelly-Anne Heinrichs spoke against urban sprawl, saying that once an area is deforested it cannot be undone.
David Greenberg said he has noticed in The Citizen’s comment section that many people write negative things about mayor and council, but he feels that the elected officials are responsive to residents’ desire.
He said he felt that residents had expressed at the public hearing that people want high-density, affordable infill development and protection for natural spaces.
Michelle Oster requested that the Agricultural and Forestry section of Moore’s Meadow be redesignated as park land in the OCP.
She said local wildlife isn’t just cute, it’s valuable — Prince George’s wildlife is known outside of the area because of things like an episode of the kids TV show Wild Kratts, which interviewed a UNBC professor about the city’s moose population.
Kyle Moffat also brought up food security issues as well as medicinal ones. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she said there was a shortage of cough syrup but there are 50 to 80 plants in the area that can be used to treat them.
This is knowledge that has been passed down to her as a First Nations woman, she said, and she feels lucky to be able to pass it on. She said the OCP should reflect the need for humans to be in harmony with nature.
Citizen columnist James Steidle said he also felt the city had become a doughnut, with forests mowed down to facilitate growth even though the population has been relatively stagnant over the past few decades.
He said the city has had to borrow millions of dollars to facilitate both existing and new infrastructure. He said the city should have saved some money by reworking the previous edition of the OCP rather than revise it like this, asking that it be sent back to the drawing board to address issues with elements like the Urban Containment Boundary.
“I don’t really see this plan as addressing the issues facing the city,” Steidle said.
Prince George Airport Authority interim CEO Sabrina Angus returned to remind council that the airport and the city have a strong track record of working together on items like development and land use.
The authority has expressed concern that the OCP doesn’t reflect its land-use authority in the areas around the Prince George Airport.
C.R. Ryser went over median salaries for people working in various industries in the city, emphasizing the need for affordable housing and to tackle food insecurity.
Speaking for a second time that evening, Merrick said after initially intending to stay for only one year, she’s been here five years and intends to remain as she feels the city has a good balance between urban and green spaces.
She asked for better connections between urban, grey and green spaces like bike paths to make it easier for people without cars to navigate around the city.
Coming into the second night of the public hearing, many residents also took the opportunity during the pause to write letters to council outlining their thoughts.
Like previous correspondence and speakers on the hearing’s first night, many of the letters expressed a desire for additional protections for green spaces like Ginter’s Green and Moore’s Meadow.
At the hearing’s first night, some developers said they were frustrated by the removal of some of their properties from the Urban Containment Boundary.
One developer sent in a letter asking for their property to be put back in the boundary while another letter asked for some properties in the Hart to remain outside of the boundary, saying the area is a wildlife habitat.
Other letters asked for more consideration for air quality initiatives, for the city to not forget the need for affordable housing and aired concerns over the infrastructure costs of planned growth within the plan.
After the conclusion of the list of public speakers and a short recess, fewer than half of the audience members present at the beginning remained in the gallery.
Mayor Simon Yu thanked everyone who came forward with their thoughts on the OCP whether they spoke in person, over the phone or sent emails.
Coun. Trudy Klassen said the OCP belongs to the residents and people felt a sense of ownership over it. She added that she hoped this was a sign that the local democracy was on the mend, saying that council felt invigorated by the public participation on this issue.
She said she hoped council would take some time to consider what was said before moving forward with it.
Yu then asked director of planning and development Deanna Wasnik to provide an overview of what the OCP contains and what it does.
After that, Anderson reminded councillors that if any amendments to the proposed OCP were passed, the city would be legally required to hold another public hearing.
Coun. Brian Skakun said he had seven amendments he wanted to propose. After listening to residents and the airport authority speak, he said he was concerned that council might forget what was raised if they waited to propose amendments.
He added that he had never seen so much public participation in all his years on council that he did on the OCP.
Ramsay said she thought it might take more than one session to go over amendments and was game to start that night. Anderson confirmed that council could motion to postpone discussion on the item to another regular meeting to continue its discussion.
Looking at the previous OCP, Ramsay said she didn’t see reference to the Urban Containment Boundary. She said she asked Wasnik about it, who told her it was called the “urban area” in the last version of the plan. Ramsay then asked Wasnik to explain the ramifications of the boundary and what it means to be in or out of it.
Wasnik explained that the boundary doesn’t override current zoning for a property and the boundary will only really affect things if a developer looks to rezone a property. She said future land use and the boundary don’t necessarily have to be considered together.
As other council members proposed amendments, Ramsay said she would consider whether they are needed this time around or whether they could wait until the next OCP revision is required by the province in 2028.
Coun. Kyle Sampson also expressed gratitude for those who spoke up about the OCP. Sampson started to talk about what amendments he wanted to make when Skakun interrupted, saying he had sent out his amendments in advance as a courtesy to his colleagues and hadn’t seen any sent by Sampson.
Continuing, Sampson said he’d like staff to report back on several items, like designating Ginter’s Green as a park, investigating the feasibility of extending Cowart Road to Malaspina Avenue and addressing the zoning issue in Moore’s Meadow.
Ultimately, he moved for a report to be prepared on the extension of Cowart Road and another report addressing the airport authority’s concerns.
The mayor said he worried that extension would cause traffic congestion, Sampson responded that he’d like those concerns to be investigated as part of the report.
Both of Sampson’s motions passed.
A motion to extend the meeting to 11 p.m. passed with Skakun, Klassen and Yu in opposition.
There was extensive discussion among council members, around 30 minutes long, about what the proper procedure would be for proposing and discussing amendments and whether they should be brought up immediately or after a pause.
Ramsay moved for administration to be directed to prepare a report about the city-owned property north of Moore’s Meadow potentially being rezoned to P1: Parks and Recreation. It was approved unanimously.
Skakun moved six motions, many of which were inspired by issued raised by Ginter’s Green Forever:
- For administration to investigate the consequences removing the right of way from 18th and 22nd avenues to Massey Drive at Ginter’s Green,
- For administration to prepare a report about rezoning that same area to P1: Parks and Recreation,
- For administration to prepare a report about potentially removing a property in Ginter’s Green from the Urban Containment Boundary,
- For administration to prepare a report about removing properties at the north end of Moore’s Meadow from the Urban Containment Boundary,
- For administration to prepare a report about removing potential future development of the Tyner Boulevard escarpment from the Urban Containment Boundary and,
- For administration to prepare a report about resetting the Urban Containment Boundary to the “urban area” listed in the previous edition of the OCP.
All Skakun’s motions were carried. The only amendments to garner opposition was the fifth, which Ramsay voted against, and the sixth, which Ramsay and Coun. Tim Bennett voted against.
Regarding the sixth motion, Klassen said she wants the city to carry out a dollar-per-acre assessment of its properties. She said there are some elements of the proposed Urban Containment Boundary that don’t make sense and hoped that staff’s report would help clarify things for her.
In addition, she said Prince George needs to think about what kind of city it wants to be and what kind of footprint it wants to have.
The mayor expressed concern that the plan does not appropriately address the city’s future sewage capacity needs. After the election is over, he said he wants to talk to the federal government about what contributions it might be willing to make towards new infrastructure.
Skakun suggested that a separate report be requested on the points made by Yu and Klassen.
All of council’s motions passed during the meeting were for reports to be prepared and not amendments of the OCP, meaning that another public hearing is not yet required.
At 11:05 p.m., council moved for their discussion to be continued at a special council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April 15 at 5 p.m. Ramsay moved an amendment for it to be held instead on Wednesday, April 16 at 5 p.m.
The amendment passed, with Sampson and Bennett voting against.
Local governments, which includes regional districts like the Regional District of Fraser-Fort George cities like Prince George, have until Dec. 31 of this year to update their Official Community Plans to include housing-specific policies over the next 20 years.
City staff told The Citizen in the lead-up to the second night of the hearing that the current version of Prince George’s OCP could be amended to include this information without the other additions if needed to meet that deadline.
The Citizen reached out to the Ministry of Housing and Municipal Affairs to inquire about whether there are consequences or penalties for local governments who do not meet that deadline.
A spokesperson said by email that compliance has been extremely high so far and the ministry is investigating whether it needs to strengthen the compliance framework for housing initiatives by the deadline, but did not say directly whether there would be punishments for local governments who miss that deadline.
