Prince George city council will reconvene its public hearing on revisions to the Official Community Plan on Wednesday, April 9.
With a room full of speakers and a lot to mull over, council decided to recess and reconvene the public hearing when it was first held on March 19 rather than end it and proceed to third reading of the bylaw adopting the OCP changes.
The province is requiring that local governments — regional districts and municipalities — update their OCPs by Dec. 31, 2025.
Ahead of the reconvened hearing, The Citizen connected with the city’s manager of legislative services, Ethan Anderson and its director of planning and development, Deanna Wasnik to ask some questions about council’s options moving forward.
Wasnik clarified that the province doesn’t require local governments to introduce a new OCP, but to add certain pieces of information.
“Under Bill 44 the province requires OCPss to be updated by Dec. 31, 2025 to include policies specific to housing (i.e. plan for housing with a timeframe of 20 years; and, address a broader range of housing types),” Wasnik said in an email.
“The OCP Review Project was already underway when Bill 44 was enacted; therefore, the changes required by the province by the end of 2025 are included in proposed OCP Bylaw No. 9525, 2025 as OCP Bylaw No. 9525, 2025 was projected to be complete in advance of the Dec. 31, 2025 Provincial deadline.
“Should proposed OCP Bylaw No. 9525, 2025 need further time for review and consideration, Administration can prepare an amendment to the existing OCP No. 8383, 2011 to meet the provincial deadline.”
However, when asked what the consequence of not meeting that deadline would be, the city staff did not provide a response.
The most popular topic amongst members of the public at the first night of the public hearing was Ginter’s Green.
While the advocacy group Ginter’s Green Forever was pleased to see future road extension plans for the escarpment along the bottom of Cranbrook Hill removed from the updated OCP, its members called for more protections for the green space and for nearby portions to be removed from the Urban Containment Boundary.
Under the OCP, the city discourages development outside of the boundary. Under provincial housing legislation, public hearings are not needed for developments outside the boundary but are required outside of it.
Some residents had similar desires for Moore’s Meadow, asking that portions of that area also be removed from the boundary.
A few landowners and developers also took issue with changes to the boundary, stating that their properties were now outside of it and that would complicate their development plans. They complained that they had not been consulted about the changes that would affect their property.
Should council want to amend the plan in any way, including modifying the boundaries of the Urban Containment Boundary, administration would need to introduce those changes before third reading of the bylaw establishing the updated OCP.
Anderson said that if any amendments are made to the bylaw establishing the OCP, council will have to hold another public hearing before voting on third reading. If council wants to make amendments after third reading is passed, Anderson said third reading can be rescinded and another public hearing held.
During the first night of the public hearing, multiple members of the public expressed disappointment with the consultation carried out by the city and the consultant it hired to help develop the OCP.
Wasnik said the city was required to follow section 475 of the Local Government Act when carrying out public consultation for the OCP.
That section states that “the proposing local government must provide one or more opportunities it considers appropriate for consultation with persons, organizations and authorities it considers will be affected.”
A local government must also consider whether this consultation should be early and ongoing and whether the local regional district, an adjacent regional district, any bordering municipality First Nations, boards of education, the provincial government and its agencies or the federal governments and its agencies should be consulted as part of this process.
This consultation is supposed to take place on top of the legally required public hearing.
“The City of Prince George went over and beyond the minimum requirement as the OCP is a high-level policy document to guide decisions on planning and land use management within the city for future decades,” Wasnik said.
“It is imperative that the residents of the community are involved in the process in creating the vision for the community they call home. The OCP Review Project commenced in 2023 and included numerous opportunities for the community to provide feedback in various forms to shape the OCP.”
She added that the findings from the consultation are available on the city’s website.
Some members of Prince George city council have advocated for further public consultation to take place before the new OCP is adopted.
Anderson said council would need to direct staff to carry out consultation as well as set a budget for that work. No money has been set aside in the 2025 budget for that person.
As for council itself, Anderson told councillors at the end of the public hearing's first night that they could consider new information between then and the second meeting, but they would have to share it with all their colleagues. Anderson also warned them that they should refrain from making comments indicating how they would vote between the hearings.
The reconvened public hearing kicks off at 7 p.m. on Wednesday, April 9 in council chambers on the second floor of Prince George City Hall.
