 |
| Prince Rupert resident Richard Wright appearing at City Council on Monday to speak to a land use request from the Prince RupertPort Authority |
"If they were to buy the property, is the Port exempt from local zoning, once they buy it as a Federal entity, can they trump municipal, local zoning bylaws? Because if they can, we're sitting here kind of wasting our time I would think. So if we can get an answer, if the public can get an answer on that question. How that will impact on everything, I think that would be great"
The above is perhaps the most important question offered up as part of a ninety minute City Council review into the request by the Prince Rupert Port Authority towards a temporary land use on Park Avenue.
The question, posed by west side resident Richard Wright, for the most part defined the key element of note from the hour and a half of discussion on the night.
And as the evening progressed, it became clear that the City of Prince Rupert couldn't provide for a complete answer for residents on that question.
However towards the theme of the approval or denial for the Port's request for a Temporary land use, the answer was a solid No, with a recommendation for the Port to consider a return in the future to request for a complete rezoning for the land along the north side of Park Avenue.
The path towards that decision started during the Committee of the Whole portion of the City Council Session, with the first item on the list the recusal of one third of the council membership as Councillors Nick Adey and Gurvinder Randhawa excused themselves from the process owing to their residency in areas that could be impacted by the development.
 |
| PRPA's Ken Veldman speaking Monday at City Council |
With two of the six elected council members outside of the Chamber, Mayor Brain introduced Ken Veldman with the Port Authority Vice President of Public Relations and Sustainability providing the thumbnail sketch of the Port's plans, making note of the temporary and more immediate use of the land as storage for containers during the upcoming expansion of DP World's container terminal facility.
He also outlined some of the themes for potential development of the land that the Port may have in mind, should they choose to purchase the land. Providing a concept of a buffer between light industrial land use and the residential area, with the prospect of parkland, trails and other amenities the featured portion of that buffer.
To close his presentation, Mr. Veldman observed that any decision by Council towards the use of the land should be weighed by considering broad economic benefit for the community both short and long term, versus the risk of impact that may be there.
Much of his presentation did not seem to sway the council membership, with Councillors Cunningham and Niesh presenting a number of questions related to the land use, the hours of operations and potential impacts on those living in both the Graham/Atlin/Alipne area, as well as the western side of the Kootenay Avenue part of the city.
A good portion of concern for the Council members was the shift of attention by the port to land north of the existing terminal facility, a theme Councillor Cunningham was particularly concerned about.
"My other question is why are you expanding north, when all along you've wanted to expand south and you have a lot of surplus property on Ridley island for this ... I see no reason why you should come north"
In reply the Port VP noted that potential use of the land beyond the initial use of the container storage use, would not be that of a wider expansion of the container terminal itself.
The next part of the overview came from the public with Mr. Wright and another participant Bruce Hansen outlining a range of concerns from those with property directly adjacent to the land under consideration.
In addition to his key question on the night of whether the Port can just go ahead and do as it wishes, Mr. Wright called attention to the concerns over noise, potential devaluation for properties in the area and the lack of information provided in the lead up to Monday evening's Council session.
Mr. Hansen relayed many of the same concerns, adding an additional item for consideration that of impact on some environmental enhancements that have been put in place in the Moresby Park area, where past remediation work on salmon streams took place.
That would bring the public participation part of the night to an end, with Council members returning to the topic about forty minutes later as they prepared to deliver their decision.
The second process once again was without the participation of Councillors Adey and Randhawa, who both stepped aside, leaving the Mayor and remaining council members to weigh the options and make their decision.
That review began with an amendment from Councillor Mirau to call for a Site Plan to be included as part of any application towards the future use of the land.
Much of the same themes of the public participation session were revived as part of the decision making, with the City Councillors observing that they really know very little about the longer term plans from the Port and were hesitant to just offer a temporary approval without more information.
Mayor Brain brought up the question from Mr. Wright of earlier in the evening, seeking the guidance of City Manager Robert Long as to whether the Port could in the end just go ahead with its plans under its use of a Federal process.
The City's Manager answer seemed to deliver more questions than solutions for Council to consider, offering a mixed response that wasn't particularly definitive towards any path forward.
The City Manager noted for Council that there are two points of view on the theme, observing that the Port has made their case in the past that their federal jurisdiction has paramountcy.
Mr. Long long then further suggested that past court cases in other jurisdictions have sided with municipal governments land use authority, or at least towards a joint jurisdictional manner on land issues.
Long did acknowledge however, that there is a possibility that such a path could also go the way of the Port when it comes to any land that it has purchased and put under their jurisdiction.
"They could make the argument that the local government land use jurisdiction is not applicable. I don't think that it's a winnable argument for them, but they have made it to us before and that really is going to be subject to the ultimate conversation with the courts" -- City Manager Robert Long
For some final thoughts on the topic, Mayor Brain observed as to how it's not a narrative of being for or against development, reminding Council of some of the good relations and partnerships that the City has developed with the Port on a range of areas, including the City's 2030 vision plan.
Mr. Brain also challenged some of the elements from the presentation that was delivered by Mr. Veldman, observing how the city doesn't believe the blanket approval of a temporary use is appropriate in this case, the Mayor calling for a larger consultation process by the Port Authority, including a Public Hearing towards a complete rezoning of the land if desired.
"Our message to the Port is you know, we're definitely wanting to work with you guys but you also have to understand that we're accountable to the residents of this community who we represent. And that neighbourhood in a very show of force, in a very short amount of time has made it very clear to us that they don't want us to proceed with a temporary use and that they have a lot of questions yet" -- Prince Rupert Mayor Lee Brain
To bring the discussion to an end on the night, Council voted to reject the Temporary Use proposal from the PRPA, suggesting that the Port should consider applying for a permanent rezoning of the land in question as well as to provide a detailed Site Plan as part of that approach for consideration.
We provide a wider overview into the details of the Port presentation, community feedback and City Council member talking points from our Council Timeline Feature here.
You can review the full conversation from the City's Video Archive starting at the beginning of the night's session, the Council members return to the topic at the one hour thirty four minute mark.
For more notes related to Monday's City Council session see our Council Session archive here.
A wider overview of past Council Discussion themes can be explored here.
No comments:
Post a Comment