The zoning battle between a residential neighbourhood and City Hall is ramping up. Neighbours are considering legal action now that city council has agreed to allow a full-service recycling centre to be established on a vacant residential lot at Vance and Wiebe Road.
Ron Gobin, a leader among the disgruntled neighbours opposed, argued the BBK bottle depot site rezoning contravenes Local Government Act, which states once an Official Community Plan (OCP) has been adopted, development must be consistent with the plan.
"I believe they [council] have hired experts, people who are trained and able to make the right choices, and they worked to develop the OCP. Those experts did their work, it was accepted, it was approved, and then in-house, City Hall has staff experts who gave the same view about this piece of land, and council still chose to go with the hired gun [land developer L&M Engineering, hired by BBK owner Austin Kim]."
Gobin said the matter was still going to have another day on the public record. He would prefer it happen on the south end of George Street not the north end.
"I'm going to be researching legal as well as other options," he said. "I have no recourse now. To have to fight against people who are supposed to have done the fight for you is ridiculous. How do you beat that? They are asking to be sued."
on Jan. 10, councillors voted five to four in favour of letting BBK Bottle Depot expand onto the block next to them, even though the OCP suggests otherwise and municipal staff urged them not to allow the new venture to go ahead in that spot.
"It is a square peg in a round hole," said Mayor Dan Rogers during the vote.
His sentiments echoed those of the residents already upset by the current level of activity at the BBK site, let alone an expansion to include paper, computer components, etc.
Councillor Brian Skakun voted against the rezoning application, and also wondered whether it contravened the Local Government Act.
Gobin said he has been meeting with neighbours and also getting city-wide support from people who see this move by city council as a threat to every residential area.
"You've got to wonder why councillors would follow the wishes of a hired gun, not the OCP and the staff of the city and the large majority of residents of the affected area," he said. "Now, there isn't a neighbourhood in this city that is safe from these demigods. They gave us all a message: they can flip the zoning of your neighbourhood with the snap of their fingers, in spite of everything their are told by their own people."
There may be a way to spare the expense and adversarial nature of litigation. Senior city staff confirmed all three main readings have been given to this rezoning application, but the cursory fourth reading has not yet been conducted.
"Yes, council could choose to do that, as there is no legislative impediment to doing so," said Nelson Wight, the city's manager of current planning and development.
Walter Babicz, manager of legislative services, said there could even be another public hearing on the issue.
"Procedurally it is possible. It is uncommon to do so," he said. "That would be based on new information, typically, coming to council's attention. We [staff] are always ready for that possibility. We react and respond to council's requests in the usual course. It would follow the same process as the first public hearing [a public advisement period] if that was requested by council."
