Dialogue between Councillor Plant and Saanich Staffer Reveals how the Local Area Plans (LAPs) are Being Nullified in the New Proposed Official Community Plan (OCP) for the District
Sasha Izard
Feb 29, 2024
During the Saanich Council deliberations on the OCP update (Feb 26, 2024 item F3. on the agenda), both staff and a councillor seemingly referred on camera to what I and another speaker had during public input pointed out: that loopholes were being added to the OCP that effectively allowed the OCP to trump Local Area Plans, despite that the LAPs are part of the OCP; thus allowing LAPs to be effectively nullified through this process when applied.
According to the dialogue between the councillor and the staffer, changes being made to the OCP would enforce for the OCP, “Supremacy” over the Local Area Plans and the LAPs could now be overridden by the OCP through these changes. Another alarming conclusion from the dialogue from the staffer was that staff had decided that they should not bother to rid the new OCP of inconsistencies!
What then was the point of the update process?
A City Planner provided the report on the OCP update.
In the Q&A that followed, Councillor Plant asked the staff (bolding was added by myself to highlight certain sections):
“Can you talk about why we are overtly talking about the supremacy of the OCP in its relation to the LAP and potentially any other plans?”
Staffer: “This was one item that council asked us to specifically explore. There’s the relationship of plans and there’s a fair amount of consultation. One of the decisions that council made was to remove the Local Area Plans from the OCP bylaw, hence really giving that primacy to the Official Community Plan and instances where there is direct conflict, this policy was added to provide that clarity that the OCP is a superior policy document.
It doesn’t mean to say that Local Area Plans won’t factor into that decision-making, but in areas where there is a direct conflict, the OCP would take precedence.”
Cllr. Plant: “Is the alternative to doing this and identifying the OCP as supremacy, as supreme, even though by nature it is the most supreme document, that we would need to go in and alter all of the Local Area Plans to make sure they were in alignment?
Staffer: “So that exercise in terms of what alterations might be needed to the Local Area Plans was completed by staff. At the end of the day, it was decided that, that was a bit perilous, in terms of you know between the linkages between the policies and Local Area Plans and it was that this the clarity between the policy of the OCP taking supremacy was a more administratively clear way to deal with any potential conflicts.”
This portion of the Q&A can be viewed starting at 2:35:15 in the following video: Council Meeting (granicus.com)
Almost an hour later at the 3:32 point, Cllr. Plant broached on the subject again:
“Generally I am very supportive of this going forward, notwithstanding the previous item. I think the supremacy of the OCP and I appreciate the residents who spoke to it and the people who wrote about it. Actually, I think wrote and spoke and then someone else wrote.
Having had to adjudicate a situation with another Local Area Plan at the time in the context of the OCP, I want this clarity, and I think it is untenable that we would go back into every Local Area Plan and change them so that they align. I think it is not expedient, I think it is appropriate to ensure that this document is as perfect as it can get, but be influenced and reminded of what the LAPs provide us. They provide us guidance for how we see our municipality shaping, but at a certain time period, and those are largely out of date.”
—————————————————————————————————
Note: I and another speaker during public input that night pointed out that we considered that the following are loopholes being proposed to be put into the plan:
7.2.3 Defer to the OCP where there is an inconsistency in policy direction between the OCP and a Local Area Plan or Action Plan.
7.2.4 Consider OCP amendments for increased residential density/height where proposed developments:
a. Advance overall plan objectives;
b. Demonstrate architectural and site design excellence;
c. Provide a significant public benefit including securing non-market or supportive housing and/or parks or community facilities.
My objections that I presented that night to 7.2.3 being added to the plan can be read here. With only 3 minutes to speak, as a member of the public I only had time to adequately review a single line of the 200 or so page document going to second reading of the proposed OCP update at the council meeting, which included numerous agenda items that night.
Democracy, or oligarchy? With a proposed OCP that I cannot see as having been generated by the public, riddled with inconsistencies and loopholes being proposed, and rushed with what I consider to be the fingerprints of the development/real estate lobby all over it; and which will allow the nullification of the Local Area Plans following their narrative that the LAPs are out of date, I think the latter is the answer.
Saanich had recently spent 10s of thousands of dollars doing Local Area Plan Updates.
—————————————————————————————————
Resources:
Council Meeting (granicus.com)
Attachment B – December 2023 Report to Council
Attachment C – Redline Version of Changes to OCP
Attachment D – Redline Version of Changes to Cadboro Bay Village Plan
Attachment E – Redline Version of Changes to Cordova Bay Village Plan
CRD Watch Homepage 
Leave a comment