Sooke votes for mandated zoning changes after BC threatens to step in

On Tuesday Sooke voted—very grudgingly, in some council members’ cases—to adopt provincially mandated zoning changes. These changes, which municipalities must adopt to comply with BC's Bill 44, enable small-scale multi-unit housing (typically 3-4 units) on land previously zoned for single-family homes. This is intended to allow for more efficient and dense housing on standard lots, without the time and cost of an individual rezoning.

A similar vote had failed in a 3-3 tie late last November, causing Sooke to miss its BC-given deadline. The policy's failure in a tie vote (For: Bateman, Pearson, St. Pierre; Against: Beddows, McMath, Tait) made Sooke an outlier in BC in avoiding the mandated changes. 

Sooke had applied for an extension last summer, saying its infrastructure would struggle to handle increased density. It was denied in the fall along with a similar case made by View Royal, but received the mini-extension to Dec. 16.

In mid-Jan., BC housing and municipal affairs minister Ravi Kahlon wrote to council that Sooke had a month to carry out the changes or the ministry would step in and use its powers to impose them. 

This week Mayor Maja Tait did not cast a vote, but the trio of councillors present all approved first, second, and third readings of the bylaw changes. Coun. Al Beddows, though, made clear that he was voting only “because there's a gun to my head.” He finds Bill 44 “disgusting" for replacing the existing rezoning process in which council would hear and weigh various voices.

“This is a jagged one,” Tait said in her pre-vote remarks, “it’s a hard pill to swallow.”

“I feel pushed into this completely.”

While all of council felt that they were being pushed, there was a clear split in amenability to the policy. Couns. St-Pierre and Bateman felt comfortable with the change, and had both already voted Yes last year. Tait and Coun. Beddows were strongly opposed, abd bothvnaf

What council members said:

Coun. Tony St-Pierre 

St. Pierre argued on Tues. that voting it through rather than letting the province impose it would let council “Do some damage control and make sure it fits the OCP and our community.” He said that despite council rightly resenting being forced, the policy itself could still have benefits and would cut down the length and cost of construction that is mostly already happening anyway.

Coun. Jeff Bateman

Bateman praised staff for compiling a “very substantial” report that council has now seen thrice. He said that he came to feel that it was best to be diplomatic and insist that BC get on with local highway upgrades—a key part of Sooke's infrastructure objections. He feels that the road projects are coming, and that ultimately a “smart growth town centre” aligns with the OCP. Staff confirmed to him that they expect post-Bill-44 density applications to “trickle in” rather than being a “gold rush.”

Coun. Al Beddows

Beddows said he was “still disgusted with Bill 44 and what it does to our community” but would still vote Yes “out of protest.” Unlike Bateman, he felt that ceding authority on this front would weaken Sooke's bargaining position in negotiations for infrastructure.

He argued that Sooke had “led the way for housing starts,” meeting the province's desire for housing. But now, he said, a system that “worked fairly well” with council hearing from the developer, public, and city staff before making “the best decision for Sooke” will be replaced by “an open house by the developer that staff and I have no standing at.” 

Mayor Maja Tait

Tait said that she has been told the district will lose grant eligibility if it has non-compliant bylaws, and personally feels that the province may be stalling on other things for Sooke due to the dispute. Losing grants and adding possible legal fees to fight the province would put too great a pressure on property taxes, she feels.

Tait also feels that the district is being tuned out whenever it advocates for itself to the province.

Watch the council video of the discussion here; it's mostly between 1:20 and 1:35.

“I don't think our letters are read or heard or acknowledged. I don’t know if that’s true but that’s how it feels.” She suggested that citizens should write more often to provincial ministries about their problems around town.

“If you are impacted by parking, congested, crowding, inability to access the swimming pool, daycare programs, or have your child go to the relevant school within your catchment, you have water pressure [issues], you're stuck in traffic,” Tait argued you should write to the local MLA, Kahlon as municipal affairs, and whichever other minister would be relevant to the problem.

No dialogue with province, Tait says

Former Sooke councillor and now Juan de Fuca – Malahat MLA Dana Lajeunesse said last Dec. that he would facilitate discussions between the district and the housing ministry. Tait says no real communication with the province ended up happening.

“There has been nothing—nothing from the province. So yes, I am severely disappointed in this approach.”

Several hundred units needed per year, report estimates

An interim housing needs report last fall estimated that Sooke will need 4,700+ units built over the next 20 years to keep up with its own growth. The district is required to adjust its zoning and OCP to this projection within the next year. Sooke is not yet on the list of BC municipalities that have to meet set annual housing targets based on these housing needs projections.

Sooke not the only local muni that BC is leaning on

Other local municipalities including Victoria, Saanich, and Oak Bay have already had building targets set by the province and received their first progress update. Oak Bay has lagged well behind its target of 66 units in the first year, building just 16, and Kahlon recently assigned an advisor to work with the district to study and address the reasons for that. This process could eventually be in store for Sooke if the two governments' disputes on housing continue into future years.