Feedback to Heed on Community Engagement, if Council's inclined

"In this case, regardless of what we decide to do tonight, there are going to be some people unhappy about it, I wish that wasn't the case, but I think that's the reality of it" -- Councillor Nick Adey speaking prior to Council's vote on the rezoning application for 11th Avenue East

It's a short sentence from a night long on commentary and speeches both by Public Hearing participants and City Council members; but with the passage above Councillor Adey, pretty well condensed the final takeaway from the process of rezoning the land now destined for the Lax Kw'alaams led 70 unit apartment building.

As each councillor spoke at the end of Monday evening, the construction of additional housing stock as viewed by Council is a victory for their housing ambitions, though the result while significant, comes amid some sluggish results to date towards building new housing stock in the community.

The forward momentum for the much needed housing in the community was one however which also came at a cost of some significant frustration from those who lived in the immediate area. 

Residents who were left with as one participant put it, a feeling that, "leaves sort of a bad taste in everybody's mouth" over how the city conducted the engagement process.

As we've chronicled on two occasions once in August, the other earlier this week, the residents raised a range of concerns and red flags in their mind as to  how the city consulted, or in the view of those in the immediate area, did not consult them properly on the zoning themes. 

And while the Mayor and Council spoke often of their Due diligence and the following of strict guidelines as outlined by the province; there does seem to be a few lessons that they could take from those disappointed residents for future consideration when the next contentious land issue comes a calling.

In addition to the significant amount of time directed towards traffic themes, there were three main items that kept coming to the top of the list of concerns from those that participated in both Public hearings.

Lack of information provided to the residents. 

Site selection and an absence of transparency on how many locations that the City may have available for large housing complexes and where they are located. 

Perceptions that they had already made up their minds on the decision, that an observation which left some of the Council members offended and insulted.

On themes of Information, as we reviewed their comments from Monday night, the residents observed of the rather sporadic nature of accessing information on the project throughout the process, and the lack of answers to questions at the First Public hearing, something which required a Second Public Hearing weeks later to follow up on. 

Looking at the process from start to finish when it comes to the theme of information sharing, it does appear that the City dropped the ball somewhat when it comes to timely updates.

While no one would expect the Councillors or city staff  to go against any provincial rules and guidelines, there seem to be areas where they could have been more involved for residents of the immediate area.

The City could have been more helpful in guiding the residents through the process through their online and Social media portals, offering prominent links well in advance to reports such as the City Planner's Answers to the questions of the First Public hearing, a document that anyone with an interest in would have to navigate the many warrens of the city's website to find on the City's Agenda page. 

For that element, along with the much discussed traffic study findings a more direct link and access to the information earlier, would certainly have been of assistance for the residents and would have given them more time to digest Mr. Buchan's findings.

The site selection theme is also one where the Councillors could have done a better job of explaining things, considering that some form of housing was planned for 11th as far back as the Prince Rupert 2030 vision presentation, those participating in the Public Hearings deserved much more in the way of detail as to just what the City had to offer for such housing in a number of locations not just in the vicinity of 11th Avenue East.

As the zoning process came to an end, City Council never really did explain to the residents how the proposed development evolved. Nor did they provide guidance as to why the site that they offered Lax Kw'alaams for their project, one which was often noted will require much more work than a site ready to build on, was seemingly the only one  that they could offer to meet the needs of the proponents.

The suggestion of an online registry through the city website that provides a list of the land that the city owns and is available for housing seems like a reasonable concept for Council to act on. Allowing as it would residents across the city to have a better understanding as to what may be ahead for their neighbourhoods and what the city's focus is when it comes to developing housing stock in the community.

Those two  themes of concern more than likely fed into the perception observed often by those in the immediate area of a Council decision  perhaps having already been made.

As for the path of this particularl development, it was noted by Mayor Brain how this had been a two year process,  and it appears to be one which started  in mid December of 2019 and the Prince Rupert 2030 vision presentation, when a housing proposal 'somewhere' on 11th Avenue East wast celebrated.

Yet for the residents it really only became a topic that they could become engaged with when the rezoning application sign went up on 11th Avenue in February of this year. 

Something which made for a significant gap in the timeline from what appears to have been the first consideration of the site and the actual work of rezoning it and consulting those who will live beside it.

A bit of proactive work by the city following the Prince Rupert Vision showcase would have been to explain much earlier for the residents of the area of the potential use for the land, something that Operations Director Richard Pucci noted was in potential flux when he was closing area lanes in August of 2020. 

The first tentative steps for the development came in November 2020, when the Corporate Adminstrator made note of the city's process towards community consultation.

But it would appear that unless those impacted were following City Council sessions closely they may not have heard of the plans, with the observation one that they were not formally made aware of the proposed development until the  the process began in earnest with that February rezoning sign. 

A process as noted by residents through two public hearings, that was not quite to the satisfaction of those who needed to know the information the most.

Monday night, the Mayor observed that Council had adopted a new process earlier this year when it comes to engaging with the public on proposed developments such as the Lax Kw'alaams one. 

Though seemingly that was an update to procedures that came a little too late for the residents of the 11th Avenue East area in this case.

The new process may very well solve some of the issues that dogged the 11th Avenue land rezoning, but at the heart of it all will be how well the City and its Mayor and Councillors communicate with the public when those new proposals arrive. 

In his closing comments during the rezoning discussion,  Mayor Brain spoke of some of the burdens that the Council members have and the many challenges they face as they work on behalf of the city's residents. 

However some of those issues at times seem to come from the own hand of Council and by their own actions, where initiatives appear without much notice and where they often don't provide for much in the way of follow up for those who may feel the impact of them the most.

The Lax Kw'alaams themes of the last few months, at times channelled similar concerns of proposed development for Kootenay Avenue area residents earlier this year, as well as some familiar replies from the Council members, the connective current from those speaking to the topic one of proper communication with residents.

The path ahead, if they were listening during these public hearings should be one that is more engaged with full information sharing with the community, that in order to ensure everyone is aware of the progress and programs that Council plan to deliver on.

However, if City Council follows the blue print of engagement that was seemingly in place in the last few months as described by the participants in the Monday hearing,  Councillor Adey and the rest of the Council collective may very well find that they will continue to be leaving many of those involved in the process disappointed.

You can review more of the past housing themes in the community from our housing archive page.

A look at how Council has addressed past issues on all themes can be explored through our Council Discussion Archive page.