A public hearing for White Rock’s newest Official Community Plan revision will take place on July 27 at 4 p.m. in the Gallery Room of the White Rock Community Centre (15154 Russell Ave.)
The hearing was scheduled after White Rock council gave first two readings on July 13 to a new OCP amendment – more than six months past the deadline given by the provincial Ministry of Housing.
The hearing will be the only chance for residents to comment on the revised plan, before it is sent on to Metro Vancouver for a regional context statement.
Final reading will need to wait until Sept. 21, and, if approved at that time, the OCP will be submitted to the province.
A majority on council – in defiance of that Dec. 31 deadline – shot down the previous OCP amendment in March, arguing that, in its approach to provincial housing targets, it did not accurately reflect the wishes of residents, or the realities of city character, density and infrastructure.
Coun. Anthony Manning presented a revised land-use concept in April. It re-focuses future density further along the North Bluff Road corridor, inside the town centre, and away from the lower hillside.
At the July 13 meeting, council members were given a formalized version of the Manning plan, prepared by the city’s planning department, with density analysis and additional expertise contributed by consultants Urban Systems.
Significantly, the presentation noted that this version of the OCP would leave the city short of the current provincial 20-year housing needs target (8,816) for the city. Mayor Megan Knight confirmed with the presenters that the shortfall would be some 4,600 units.
Nonetheless, the majority (Manning and councillors Christopher Trevelyan, David Chesney and Susan Bains) passed the first two readings, over objections from Knight and councillors Elaine Cheung and Bill Lawrence.
Those who voted for the current amendment argued that the provincial housing target is “theoretical” – and based on policy that has made no allowance for the realities of White Rock’s current high density and already stretched-to-the-limit infrastructure.
“These are arbitrary numbers made up in Victoria in an exercise in centralized planning across the entire Lower Mainland that makes no reference to the relevant contexts of individual communities,” Trevelyan said.
He added he is not willing to capitulate to “top-down policy.”
“Just obeying it and then going out to do photo-ops, do what the province says – why do we even exist as a council?” he asked.
“If I believed that these arbitrary numbers… would reduce housing costs, I would be supportive of it. But I don’t. Vancouver has built more than virtually any other city in North America, yet prices have gone up 300 per cent.”
In opposition, Knight, Lawrence and Cheung criticized Manning’s revision – presented at the meeting by planning manager Neethu Syam and Urban Systems’ Melissa Clements – as having no input from planning experts.
They also noted that new features of the revised OCP amendment will have no opportunity for further public consultation, other than the public hearing – while stressing that provincial deadlines to finalize the OCP must be met (Cheung quoted yet another warning letter to council from housing minister Christine Boyle).
They also repeated arguments that the city is “the creation of the province” and that the province has powers to set goals for local government.
Among other objections, Knight underlined the revision’s estimated shortfall in meeting the 20-year housing target.
“Where are we going to put (the 4,600 units)?” she wondered.
“Are we counting on SSMUH (small scale multi-unit housing) to magically make all those units around the city? Is that the theory?”
“At the moment, any development is theoretical,” Manning countered. “(Because) no-one’s really building anything.”
“What council is trying to do is find a compromise between the additional density uptown, and spreading more density out along our largest corridor, North Bluff (Road),” he said.
“We should be complementing what Surrey is doing across the street and not trying to compete – our infrastructure in White Rock cannot take that.”
Manning added that while he believes that it will be possible to meet housing needs in the long-term – between SSMUH and the direction of the current OCP – it is “going to be a much slower process.”
“What is potentially going to happen is that, as the (newest OCP report) notes, we do have a stronger emphasis on transition areas, lower-rise residential forms and scaled mixed-use development. And focusing more on six-storey (development) is probably going to see more shovels in the ground than a highrise, in the short term.”
Cheung said that Manning’s plan, by putting much of the density along North Bluff Road is “like creating a wall that separates White Rock from Surrey.”
“I’m not an urban planner, but I’m going to guess when you put a wall between two cities it’s probably not the best urban planning practice,” she said.
“Can you imagine if you woke up one day and next to your house you’ve got a six-storey building and you didn’t even know, because there’s (been) no public consultation whatsoever?”