With 11th Avenue East Public Hearing concluded, Council approves third reading of bylaw and moves proposed rezoning on towards Final Approval

The final words from those with an interest in the 11th Avenue East
apartment proposal were heard on Monday night at the resumed
Public Hearing for the development

Prince Rupert City Council returned to its work towards the suspended Public Hearing of August into a rezoning request for land on 11th Avenue East, the Councillor resuming the session on Monday, with the evening one of updated information from six weeks ago from those working on behalf of the proponents, along with a continued theme of frustration for those living in the immediate area for the proposed 70 unit apartment complex.

While the August session was an in person event, as things resumed on Monday, it was by way of an online Zoom session, that owing to the City returning to COVID protocols on public gatherings. 

The result of that change for the session and the gap between meetings was one that clearly delivered a much reduced level of participation for this second attempt, with only four members of the public participating through the Zoom link from the perspective of the area residents. 

The ninety minute discussion of some outstanding issues and introduction of new themes began with a thirty minute review of the project design and traffic impacts, something that one of the residents group later would note left them with less time to speak in what was originally scheduled as a one hour hearing, however as the hearing evolved it did last an additional thirty minutes.

There was not much new to be learned from the first third of the session, other than some of the roadway calming modifications studied by McElhanney Engineering that had been introduced towards reducing concerns over traffic flow. That mostly by the proposed introduction of traffic bulges to narrow the road at Edward as well as a cross walk were explained as traditional approaches to address speeding problems like those that had been identified previous.

Image from the Public Hearing presentation of Monday night

"They give the travelling public the sense that the road is narrowing by bringing in the curbs and as a result it slows people down. We have a  couple of extra benefits that work at this particular location; understating that aside from the speeding issue raised by the residents, there was also a concern about sight-lines coming out of this. Both because of the parked vehicles and the proximity to a retaining wall in the Northwest corner. 

Both of these would also be improved with the creation of these bulbs and also of course with the understanding that there's transit and pedestrians in the area; especially with the new potential for crossing between the residential areas. 

This invites a crosswalk at the same location which the bulbs would give another opportunity to reduce the crossing distance thereby  improving  the pedestrian safety as well. So it really is one solution that hits a lot of the concerns that were raised with this issue with this intersection . -- Glenn Stanker on the traffic issues related to the area of the proposed development

 Mr Stanker would also observe on the traffic study and its findings later on the night's proceedings, providing for a review that there would not be a significant impact on traffic from the introduction of the new housing to the area.

"For the most part, the study was very standard, there was nothing really earth shattering about the extra forty cars that are predicted ... they're all very well accepted rates for what you would expect for seventy units, it's a very modest amount of traffic being added ... We had the opportunity to hear from the residents directly and understand what was the main problems with the intersection.  

It's rare that we can find one solution that can actually address all of the problems of the intersection ... the use of these bulbs, the intersection curb extensions have been used for decades even in Northern BC here  and it's an accepted and proven way to slow traffic speeds. The curb extensions gives vehicles a chance  to see around the retaining wall as well as the parked cars ... the pedestrian safety is improved by the reduced crossing distance for the crosswalk. 

It's actually a very logical approach to resolving this and I think you'll see a lot of improvements to the existing problems of the intersection; with very little issue brought in from the development traffic itself"

With the main focus for the hearing to hear from those in the area who had provided their initial insight into the proposed development in August and before he turned the session over to those participating by Zoom the Mayor noted of how Council was approaching the Public Hearing on the night.

"This public hearing is about us listening to you, and listening to the public's feedback, your comments and your concerns. We are not the proponent of this project. You just heard from the proponent, our job is to hear from you on why you feel strongly, or not strongly about a project like this. 

So we won't be entertaining a debate with members of the community here, we're just here to hear your concerns. If you have questions, the proponent will do their best to address them and have been doing their best to address them. 

This is the second public hearing we're doing for this project, with is the first time we've done this in the eight years that I've been mayor. It's another opportunity for the community to have a chance to have a say, so that the questions that were outstanding fro the last meeting were being addressed and so those reports and things like that were brought out to the community, so I just want to make sure that is clear, what our role is" -- Mayor Lee Brain

When it came the turn for those registered to speak on the night, they were allocated five minutes per speaking opportunity to share their comments or concerns, though that rule for the most part was overlooked.

Among the dominant themes expressed  collectively by the group on the speaker's list were frustrations from the process, the ongoing issues related to traffic and what they believed was a lack of information provided to them related to how the site was selected and offered to the proponents by the City.

The flow of that conversation was one that was a mix of measured, animated and at times rather amplified commentary, as the residents of the area tried to impress on the City council members of their concerns.

Some of the more frequent comments and concerns included:

On Traffic and Density themes:

"I know their solution to the traffic was the bulges, I'm not certain that's going be sufficient ... and now we're adding a crosswalk there, so my concern is now I need to worry about traffic coming both ways on a busy street, and the probably cars parked ... and now I have to worry about pedestrians crossing there as well with no sort of controlled light or anything so that is a concern of mine. Especially when there's going to be families down there, so we're looking at 200 to 300 or more people so that's a huge amount of volume in such a small spot"

"Because 11th is so busy there should be an additional exit or entrance other than the one just on Edward. I think when you get that sort of density of people there, there should be some way to alleviate traffic other than always forcing it out onto 11th ... I know a traffic study was done in March of this year, I'm a little disappointed with that to be perfectly honest, I think it should have been done over you know two or three different months ... I think if you do it just over one specific time I don't really know if you get a true taste of what traffic is like over here"

"The traffic, what do you call them bulges, and you think that's going to make a difference? Our street is so narrow already that turning with a regular vehicle is already dangerous, especially when its foggy, when it's rainy  ... you want to add less room, you're asking for a nightmare. That's your answer to the question, makes me question this whole process. The fact that you didn't even have answers to these questions in the beginning is ridiculous. But to have traffic bulges, that's a dumb answer to a ridiculous question, there's got to be a different design for that"

On engagement with the community:

"I haven't had a question that I posed to at the last forum, I haven't had a question answered yet on anything tat I delivered that night.  So I'm just curious you know as to obviously my points I brought up  ... I heard earlier the architect mention that she's been speaking with the community and the like, and I really would wager to say that she's been speaking more with City Hall than rather than the community ... I don't know that specifically in the people in the surrounding area have any more information, have any more voice the anyone else"

"I realize progress is change and that's fine, but even when you know there was Prince Rupert 2.0 and what have you, it was never a consideration that we would have a six storey ... in our neighbourhood. When the process is being laid out, it's not really consistent with what we've experienced with our property  ... Those that have a vested interest in what's going to happen should speak at the rezoning thing, I appreciate the designer and her speaking ... but you know we're going until 7 o'clock and half an hour of it was to talk about the design features of the building, and I realize that they're supposed ti be giving a presentation to Council and Mayor  ... but to me it's taking time away from citizens that want to speak "

"The fact that we're even in an open hearing still, a month after the first Open hearing, is kind of a joke to me, because the questions that were posed to you guys, Council in the first meeting were very simple they were traffic related, they were environmental related, these are answers you guys should have had off the bat and you didn't and it's ridiculous to me"

"After the first hearing I was told, I think we were all told, that there would be something mailed to us or at least delivered to us, regarding the questions that we had asked in the first hearing and we would have some answers. ... that we could go over and have some information. My information did not show up until this Friday afternoon ... maybe for other people in my neighbourhood they may not even have seen it yet. So the lack of communication between City and citizen and between this project and everyone else, is just infuriating, it's absolutely insane ... You want to push this thing through, it's like you've already made up your mind"

"It's really just been disappointing with Council, honestly like and you know I find that really unfortunate because you know we are the one's who voted you in there to represent us ... and I know my husband has spoken with a couple of the councillors there in regard to it and I know the general consensus is with all of us and I know other people has been the lack of information ... it's very disappointing as a taxpayer and as person who voted for all of you people that you aren't there representing my interests and the community's interest at large"

"I know myself ... I did make the request for the zoom link and such and I was told I would get it and I had to followup today to get, so I think that the communication hasn't been very good ... and that sort of leaves a bad taste in everybody's mouth too we just really feel that nothing has been up front and that's important ... in order to get the information you really have to hunt for it ... I think just for projects going forward it should be a little more organized and a little more transparent and you known, then people don't think that you're hiding something"

On the site selection process for the proposed development:

"No one seems to have real answers to these questions. I am all for housing in Prince Rupert, we need lots of it, more than one building, but why put it in such a ridiculous area, why in a swamp, it makes no sense. I share this sentiment with a lot of people, you guys say you talk to the community, well you didn't talk to our community, the community that actually represents this area ... I also would like to know the transparency on this, there's got to be other city land that's available, but it's nowhere to be found, where can I go and find city land that could be used for this project, and again I'm for the project just not this location  ... but where can we find this information online"

The final twenty minutes or so of the Public Hearing on the night, for the most part provided a final opportunity for the proponent's team to tie up some of the loose ends of the conversation on the night, and addressing a few of the outstanding questions that came out of the public participation.

The Mayor and Council would return to the topic as part of the Regular Council Session, that during the introduction of the third reading of the bylaw required for the rezoning.

Councillor Wade Niesh, expressed how he was offended at the thought that Council had already made up their mind, recounting some of the steps that the proposal had gone through during the process.

"This hasn't been a project that has just been pushed through, I'm offended by that statement, because you have to start somewhere, and starting somewhere is saying we have this land available, this land available and this land available"

Councillor Nick Adey spoke to realizing that someone was going to be disappointed by the time Council made their decision on the rezoning request.

"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 ... a lot of concerns were expressed particularly at the first public hearing related to things that the city could actually address, related to things that the proponent could address ... and I see a great deal of movement there. So I think to say that the people who have concerns haven't been heard,; is really negated by the responses to their concerns in the proposal as it now stands"

Councillor Cunningham as well took issue with tone of some of the commentary and perceptions of Council's work on the file.

"First of all I want to agree with Councillor Niesh that I find it rather insulting that our body language and our minds were made up by body language or other things,  I don't think we wouldn't have had a second meeting if our minds are made up ...  if our minds are made up we just walk away from it"

Councillor Randhawa tackled some of the traffic themes and concurred with some of the concerns of the residents, suggesting some other speed reduction options should be considered for portions of 11th Avenue. He also noted of the need for housing and how the project would help towards the need to provide for that in the community.

To open his review, Councillor Mirau spoke to the larger housing debate in the community.

"I think it's fair to say based on everything we've heard not just tonight, but also the last public hearing, and everything the last few months. Is that he housing debate surrounding this rezoning application I think is actually larger than the project itself.  And at a bare minimum I think what everyone can agree on is that our city, we need more housing, we need lots of it and we need it quickly"

Mr. Mirau then provided for an extensive point by point review of six elements and merits for the project he wished to focus on as part of his observations from the two hearings.

He also observed of the one thing that jumped out for him during the duelling petition process over the last few months of the engagement process and noted of one of his final thoughts on the proposal

"I want to make sure that all of my fellow creatures have a safe place to lay their head when the wind picks up and the rain comes down  ... I want to make sure that everyone has an opportunity to find housing that's appropriate to them"

Councillor Skelton-Morven also addressed some concerns that he had on the elements of what he called blatant disrespect that he found from some of the presentation on the night.

"For us as politicians this comes with the territory ... this is what we're used to, I signed up for I don't have thin skin or anything like that ... and I will accept the commentary and the  disrespect and the anger and the outrage  ... what I will not accept, is that they will speak to the staff, the proponents and the working members of the staff and also the ultimate disrespect towards Lax Kw'alaams and their governing council'

He also spoke to his own personal story in the community, to issues of systemic racism and how as an elected official he was pleased to be moving this project forward, a storyline he would expand on later in the evening through his Social Media feed.

The Mayor spoke last to the topic, with Mr. Brain addressing the concerns of the public over the process that the Council has to follow.

"Everything we've done in this process is exactly almost to the tee, what every other community has to do in terms of its process. It might feel like we're not going out of our way to be communicative, but in fact we do everything that we're supposed to be doing. In fact we've gone above and beyond, even though some will never feel like we did do that. So I understand that frustration.

Mr. Brain then outlined how the city's new process for consideration of projects, which they put in place earlier this year may alleviate some of the issues that came up through the course of the hearing process 

The Mayor also explored some of the challenges that Council faces when it comes to considering elements such as property related themes and how the Council members have other pressures placed on them.

"I'll be honest with you, we've received hundreds of comments on this project. So if you think about it from our perspective for a moment. We take all realities and they get downloaded onto us. From all sides of every spectrum of belief. 

For anything to be quite honest with you all of societies problems, whether we're responsible for them or not. Council deals with more than just what we're responsible for. 

We deal with all of the problems of society, we're in the trenches and there's higher levels of government that don't necessarily have to deal with the on the ground issues ... 

We are in this community, every problem that affects you affects us we're literally your neighbours just making sure that this town can be better, that's why we run for office, that's why we get elected"

From those contributions, Council then held its vote on the re-zoning bylaw, approving it unanimously, sending it off to the Transportation Ministry for a review prior to returning for final adoption in the future.

The Mayor then advised those watching the session that by law, the members of City Council will not be able to discuss the topic with anyone until after it gains final approval.

You can review both elements of the night from the City's Video Archive.

The Public Hearing opens the presentation, the community residents weigh in at the twenty five minute mark, the Council members discuss what they heard and voted on the bylaw at then hour forty three minute mark.

More notes on Monday's Council Session can be reviewed as part of our Council Timeline Feature.

Further items of note from Prince Rupert Council can be explored through our Council Discussion feature.