Latest news with #OfficialCommunityPlan
CTV News
29-07-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
Coquitlam councillors vote to advance development, despite opposition
The debate over density has become a common theme in Metro Vancouver and now a group of Coquitlam residents have taken their fight to city hall. A development in a Coquitlam neighourhood straddling Burnaby is closer to moving ahead following a Monday night vote. Coquitlam city council voted unanimously to give first, second and third readings to a proposal to replace a dozen single-family homes with three buildings – one seven-storey building and two six-storey buildings –near Roy Stibbs Elementary school. One after another, councillors shared their reservations with the project proposed by the developer Anthem, but also expressed concern that if they voted 'no' on Monday, the developer could come back with something larger, which it would be entitled to do. For residents opposing the project, the fact they weren't able to voice their opposition through a public hearing isn't going down well. 'We've had individual councillors come into our neighbourhood, walk around, and us explain to them what our concerns are, and they're all sympathetic, but nobody seems to think there's anything they can do about it,' said Janet Krgovich with the Roy Stibbs Residents group. It's the latest example of frustrations in a municipality over rules imposed by the provincial government, which is aiming to speed up home construction amid record-breaking population growth. 'We need to have the government back off, let us do our own planning, and let us do it the way the community needs to grow, because we were doing a really good job before they stepped in and messed things up for us,' said Cheryl Andrichuk with the Roy Stibbs Residents group. Members of the group had a range of concerns, but insisted it's not about density, stating not enough of the units are intended for families. There are also environmental concerns, which include fears about mature trees being removed. 'The provincial government is talking about calling for transit-oriented development,' said Kathleen Wallace-Deering with the group Protect Coquitlam Urban Forests. 'And what these residents and what we're all saying, is have transit-oriented living. Livable neighbourhoods, healthy urban forest, tree canopy and the right kind of housing – affordable housing.' Ultimately the lack of a public hearing or the sense of meaningful consultation has rubbed the neighbourhood the wrong way. 'We talked to the city planners and they said, well, city council tells us what to do,' Andrichuk said. 'And then we talked to city councillors, and they said, well, the province makes the rules. So we keep going around and around and around in this circle, and we're shut out of this whole process.' On the topic of a public hearing, Coquitlam Mayor Richard Stewart says it's out of his control. 'About 90 per cent of our developments comply with the OCP, the Official Community Plan, and the province has said we're not allowed to hear from the public on those ones, because they believe it will speed [the process],' Stewart told CTV News on Monday. 'These residents have every right to be frustrated, that they don't perceive that council gets to listen – we don't get to listen.' The developer, Anthem, declined an interview but said in a statement it met with residents, even though it had no obligation to do so, noting its proposal was within the limits set out in the community plan. During a public question period session as the meeting stretched into early Tuesday morning, councillor Dennis Marsden responded to comments made by Andrichuk, saying he would send a video of her statement to the provincial government, and raise the issue in September when council hopes to meet with new Housing Minister Christine Boyle.
Global News
22-07-2025
- Business
- Global News
B.C. slaps Oak Bay, West Vancouver with directives amid slow progress on housing
The British Columbia government has ordered two of the province's most unaffordable cities to make changes to encourage housing construction. On Monday, the province issued ministerial directives to Oak Bay, near Victoria on Vancouver Island, and West Vancouver to amend their zoning bylaws to reach their mandated housing targets. The directive for West Vancouver includes amending the city's Official Community Plan bylaw to allow for more density in the Park Royal-Taylor Way area and adjacent to the Ambleside and Dundarave areas. 7:03 West Vancouver council passes bylaw to increase housing density Oak Bay must make changes for minor development variances and parking bylaws to better accommodate multi-unit residential projects, the province says. Story continues below advertisement It must also update its official community plan with a focus on housing by the end of the year. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy Both municipalities have failed to meet their year-one housing targets as set by the provincial government. West Vancouver has delivered 58 of its 220 net new units target, while Oak Bay has delivered 16 of the 56 new units it was asked to build.
Hamilton Spectator
19-07-2025
- General
- Hamilton Spectator
Council Moves Forward with Aquifer Protection Plan
Gibsons Council has approved the next step in a long-running effort to strengthen protections for the Town's drinking water supply. At its July 8 regular meeting, council voted to include updated language for Development Permit Area No. 9 (DPA 9) in the upcoming public engagement process for the Official Community Plan (OCP) update. The revised language focuses on safeguarding Aquifer 560, which supplies much of the town's water. The changes aim to streamline the permitting process while clarifying how development can proceed without compromising the aquifer's integrity. 'This has been in the works for a while,' said Trevor Rutley, director of infrastructure services, who presented the report. 'We're now at the point where we're ready to share it with the public.' The updated DPA 9 narrows its objectives to focus specifically on protecting the aquifer and the low-permeability layer that shields it. Two previous objectives — related to water conservation and contamination — are now addressed through other regulations, including the Town's Water Regulation Bylaw and the Provincial Contaminated Sites Registry. One of the more technical changes involves how and when development permits are triggered. Site investigations, for example, will no longer require a permit under DPA 9, as they'll be regulated through a separate Aquifer Protection Bylaw, expected later this year. The responsibility for reviewing permit applications will also shift from the Planning Department to Infrastructure Services. The DPA boundary has been redrawn based on updated aquifer mapping completed in 2024. The new map divides the area into three subareas, each with different depth thresholds for ground disturbance — ranging from 1.5 metres in the most sensitive zones to 30 metres in areas where the aquifer lies much deeper. Council members raised questions about how 'ground disturbance' is defined and whether the Town should consider regulating the weight of structures built above the aquifer. Staff acknowledged those concerns and said further refinements may come through public feedback. The motion to include the draft language in the OCP engagement passed unanimously. Jordan Copp is Coast Reporter's civic and Indigenous affairs reporter. This reporting beat is made possible by the Local Journalism Initiative . Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Hamilton Spectator
26-06-2025
- Business
- Hamilton Spectator
Contentious Anmore South proposal withdrawn by developer on eve of public hearing
The contentious Anmore South proposal is officially on ice. Just hours before a public hearing to Anmore's Official Community Plan (OCP), Icona Properties announced it was withdrawing the application. 'It's become clear that our proposal, though supported by many, has also caused division. This was never our intent. In fact, it's the opposite of what we set out to do,' said Icona's CEO Greg Moore. 'We've made the decision to withdraw our current application for Anmore South. This break will allow us to explore a path forward that brings more unity than discord. 'Our sincere hope is that this step will help ease tensions and create the space for a collaborative, community-driven solution.' The Village of Anmore's council chambers erupted in cheers and claps after a resident read Moore's message to a crowd of hundreds of residents. The application was recently advanced to a public hearing by a 4-1 vote earlier this month. But despite a scaled back development proposal – 1,750 residential units, down from 2,200 – council's debate was marked by a divided and frustrated public gallery. Residents have long expressed concerns that the 151-acre development is out of step with Anmore's rural character and that the public consultation process has been insufficient. Several neighbourhood groups have recently pushed for a referendum on the development, which has been resisted by council. One such group, the Anmore Neighbours Community Association (ANCA), even formally warned the village on May 15 that it intended to pursue legal action if the OCP amendment process for Anmore South continued unchanged. ANCA's lawyers accused the village of procedural fairness breaches, councillor bias, democratic suppression, and infringing on freedom of expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Neighbouring municipalities have also weighed in. Port Moody submitted a formal letter criticizing the lack of infrastructure planning – particularly with respect to traffic, utilities, and emergency services –and raised alarms about environmental risks, especially given the sensitive ecosystems near the site. The Village of Belcarra offered a similar critique. Dialogue around the Anmore South proposal has been fraught with division since engagement first began in 2021. Accusations of NIMBYism, disinformation, and corruption have been frequent and recurring. Council received 63 written submissions regarding the OCP amendment, which would have changed the land use designation to allow for the development. While most of the correspondence was opposed to the land use change, many residents offered support, citing more affordable options and options for downsizing seniors. One Anmore renter, Juan Gaviria, said he was deeply concerned by the 'toxic environment' surrounding the development process. He said that he supported the amendment because it offered tangible benefits like improved infrastructure, expanded recreational amenities, new facilities, and diversified housing types. 'It is a sad state of affairs when fear and aggression overshadow reasoned, respectful discourse,' Gaviria said. 'Despite holding a full-time professional job and running a business, I cannot afford to purchase a home in Anmore.' Jordan Birch, speaking for his family of six, said he was 'disgusted' by Anmore's NIMBYism and neighbourhood associations, which he described as 'seeding doubt and division' in the community. He noted that over 42 percent of the land is dedicated to parks and conservation, that the project would expand the municipal tax base, and connect Anmore to Metro Vancouver's servicing. 'The Anmore South Neighbourhood Plan is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build a resilient community,' Birch said. 'I am appalled by those who disguise their opposition as community care, ignoring the long-term consequences of blocking progress.' After receiving word that Icona had rescinded its application, Mayor John McEwen released a statement on the village website, stating the village chose not to proceed with the hearing. 'Needless to say, this came as a surprise, and we are still confirming details of icona's intentions,' McEwen said. 'I do not know what will be considered next for Anmore South, as it is up to the applicant.' McEwen added that council legally had to consider the application, and acted in 'good faith,' and pushed for neighbourhood plan and community engagement beyond what was required. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Hamilton Spectator
18-06-2025
- Business
- Hamilton Spectator
6-storey mixed-use proposal in Moody Centre faces questions over size, trees, and affordable units
A new proposal to build a six-storey mixed-use building just steps from the Moody Centre SkyTrain station has been submitted to city hall, though staff caution the project may be trying to fit too much into too small a site. The application for 2805–2811 St. Johns St., which aims to rezone two single-family lots into a 52-unit mixed-use development, was before Port Moody's land use committee on June 2. Under the province's newly legislated Transit Oriented Areas (TOA), the developer is allowed to build up to a 12-storey building. The application includes 15,317 square feet, of commercial space at ground level, topped by five floors of strata housing, and a rooftop amenity patio. Six of the units are being proposed as below-market rentals, along with 71 underground parking spaces. Although the developer is opting for less height, they are pushing the upper bound for maximum allowable density. The floor area ratio, which measures a project's total floor space against its lot size, it set at 3.84, which approaches the 4.0 limit permitted under the TOA guidelines. City planners say this attempt to hit maximum density without exceeding the six-storey form has created 'significant challenges,' including massing impacts on neighbouring lots, a lack of sufficient open space, and conflicts with urban forestry goals. 'Trying to achieve the density of a 12-storey building within a six-storey envelope makes it very difficult to meet design and livability standards,' the staff report stated. City policy calls for a minimum lot size of 25,833 sq. ft. and 197 feet of frontage for this scale of development. However, the proposed project covers 17,427 sq. ft. with 131 feet of frontage – both well below those thresholds. Staff say this could orphan adjacent lots, making redevelopment more difficult in the future. The report recommended acquiring a neighbouring lot – particularly to the east – to achieve a better fit and reduce design impacts. The building's rear access along St. Andrews Street is also a concern. Instead of contributing to the city's vision for a pedestrian and cyclist-friendly corridor, the project proposes using much of its frontage for parkade access, loading bays, and a transformer. Environmental concerns are also raising red flags. City staff pointed out that the proposal includes no plans to preserve mature trees or incorporate new canopy coverage, falling short of Port Moody's Urban Forestry Strategy. Of particular concern is a red oak tree at 2805 St. Johns, believed to be over 100 years old and potentially at risk. The inclusion of affordable housing also falls short of city expectations. Although the applicant says six units meet the 15 percent requirement, staff say the calculation is based on 'sellable area,' not total residential floor area as required. By the city's measure, only 11.5 percent is being offered. Despite these concerns, city staff acknowledged the proposal aligns with the area's Official Community Plan (OCP) designation and brings active commercial frontage to St. Johns Street. The project is in the early stages and will undergo a more detailed review by staff and council before any decisions are made. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
