Emotions run hot over Royal Beach rezoning application

The hillside atop Royal Beach has rapidly densified over the last seven years since GableCraft Homes began construction in the neighbourhood north of Latoria Road in Colwood. There are still more homes planned for that area, but most of the future growth will be in two other developments, one south of Latoria Road and the other east of Metchosin Road. GableCraft’s Latoria South complex used to be a gravel quarry, but will soon be a complex of 2,100 homes and a commercial centre that will include the Royal BC Museum’s new collections and research building.

On the other side of Metchosin Road is Royal Beach: a steep plot of waterfront land where co-developers Seacliff Properties and Reliance Properties have proposed 2,850 homes in a mix of single family houses, townhouses, and condominiums, some commercial space, and parks.

The Royal Bay Homeowners Association has that development under a microscope. Residents filled Colwood council chambers last Thursday night for a public hearing about changes to Seacliff’s zoning plan.

Within the early plans for the development being called Royal Beach, developers had sketched out eight zones with roughly placed roads. On Thursday, Colwood council heard from the developer and the public regarding proposed changes to that zoning map—slight shifts in boundaries between the zones. Seacliff called the application a minor “housekeeping” change that came after their team worked out where roads would actually go.

But the Royal Bay Homeowners’ Association, led by president John English, came out in force to oppose the change. English told council, “The process is, in our opinion, severely tainted and that goes right into the heart of public trust.”

He was referring to the fact that Coun. Dean Jantzen received a $200 campaign contribution from Seacliff’s director of development, Georgia Desjardins, in the 2018 election. Desjardins, who presented on behalf of Seacliff at the hearing, also contributed $200 to Aaron Weisgerber who ran unsuccessfully for council four years ago.

English wants Jantzen to recuse himself from decisions related to Seacliff.

“I’d ask each of you to look in your souls and do the right thing for the people of Colwood,” he said to council at the public hearing.

Last night at a Colwood council meeting, Jantzen responded to the call for him to recuse himself from decisions related to Seacliff Properties.

"Accepting the small amount of money to support my candidacy has had absolutely no bearing on any decision that I've made on behalf of this community. To infer anything else is wrong," he said.

In 2018 when Jantzen was first elected, Mayor Rob Martin—who had just beat out former mayor Carol Hamilton—told him, “You're now responsible for those that live here, but also those that may choose to live here in the future.”

That’s one reason Jantzen gave for supporting the Royal Beach development, to make sure Colwood is available for people not fortunate to already have been living there for decades.

BC’s Community Charter lays out ethical standards for locally elected officials and says a councillor with financial interest in a decision must declare a conflict of interest, and remove themselves from the decision-making process. But nothing in the charter or election campaign contribution rules indicates that campaign contributions are considered financial interest. There is a limit on how much an individual can contribute to an election—it was $1,200 in 2018—and names and amounts are publicly disclosed.

Simmering frustration on display

Many comments at the public hearing were beyond the scope of the rezoning proposal before council, and residents clearly had built up emotion about overall development in the area.

“This is the first time I’ve spoken to council in 19 years, I’m so angry,” said one local, Darcy Campbell. Since everyone who stood up to speak or phoned in were opposed to the development, “where is the support for the developer other than from city council? That’s not representing us as citizens and taxpayers.”

Some speakers complained their view would be ruined by the height of the buildings—up to 12 storeys. Others resisted the overall density of the area, the impact on traffic, road safety, and strain on infrastructure, and frequent amendments to Colwood’s Official Community Plan (OCP). Ian Ward, a Royal Bay resident who’s running for council told the current council, “You are the owners of the OCP. If we can’t rely on the people at this table to deliver on the OCP and hold developers accountable, then who can we rely on?” He asked council to delay their decision until after the election, arguing that if it’s really as minor a change as Seacliff says then it can’t be very urgent, either.

A repeated concern was that 12-storey buildings would potentially block the commanding panoramic view of the Juan de Fuca Strait. The boundary shifts could potentially allow one of these towers to be in a slightly different location, though as Coun. Michael Baxter pointed out, nothing in the current bylaw controls the specific location of the building either.

He introduced a motion on Monday night that would control any tower higher than four storeys to ensure they follow the landform which passed unanimously. Staff will come back to council with options for how to achieve this.