Haldi Road Court Case Wraps Up
Friday, April 27, 2012 @ 1:16 PM
Prince George, B.C. – Legal arguments have concluded in the B.C. Supreme Court case between Janice Louis Sevin and the City of Prince George over the rezoning of the former Haldi Road school.
The property was re-zoned, against the wishes of Haldi Road area residents, to allow for the development of a residential recovery centre for up to 30 women. Lawyer Roy Stewart, representing Ms. Sevin, says what the case comes down to is reasonableness, whether the City acted within reason in approving the by-law outside of what the Official Community Plan stipulates is a rural residential area.
The City’s lawyer, Raymond Young, argues that council can arrive at any number of decisions as long as they are rational. He says consistency with the O.C.P. is very broad and says case law says that even if a by-law is in conflict with the O.C.P., council is still within its rights to enact the by-law. He also argues that the community plan has over-arching principles that apply to both urban and rural areas and that, although the Prince George O.C.P. provides for housing in the area in question, the over-arching provisions allow this development. He says the new zoning for the former school is consistent with the O.C.P. and council was entitled to proceed with it. Young argues no special costs should be awarded if the petitioner is successful.
Stewart says the assertion by the City that a therapeutic centre is a residential use is flawed. He says the assertion is made because the area is designed for residential use only under the OCP. Stewart says the City’s assertion that 30 women needing treatment in residence, being dealt with by up to 10 staff in a facility with high security is so blatantly wrong from a logical point of view. He says “the Official Community Plan is there as a long-term plan and any by-law has to comply with it, it has to be consistent with it. And the Official Community Plan for this area describes it as rural-residential. And so, if you want to put an institution with therapeutic treatment in a rural-residential area you’re going to have to prove that it’s a rural-residential use. The City cannot draw upon the O.C.P. in such a way as to make it nothing more than a fictional effort to regulate development, they have to comply with it and that’s where the difference is right now.”
Stewart says the court has to define the boundaries of reasonableness. “Does the decision fall within the boundaries of what a reasonable decision is.” Stewart says “here what is outside the boundaries of reasonableness is any by-law which is inconsistent with the OCP.”
Stewart says the judgement in the case could well be precedent-setting for municipal law in BC. He says while reserved, he is somewhat optimistic about the outcome.
Mr. Justice John Truscott has reserved decision, adding that he has a lot of well-presented material to go over. Stewart believes a decision in the case could be rendered sometime this summer.
Comments
“The Cityâs lawyer, Raymond Young, argues that council can arrive at any number of decisions as long as they are rational”
So the test then becomes whether this was a rational decision.
When the entire area of the city can be looked at to place such a facility, what then becomes a way of selecting location A over B in such a way that the decision is rational?
I think the nmormal place to start is to determine what the criteria would be.
So what were the criteria?
That someone wanted to locate it there?
That the neighbourhood wanted the facility to be there?
That the use was compatible with the adjacent uses?
One could go on and on.
I do not think that there was a list of criteria against which one could measure the appriopriateness of the location.
Seeing that there was no list of criteria, a rational decision could not be made.
The entire City To place such a group facility
I shidder to think what our past Mayor Mercier and his buddies would have thought about this. Is this whole thing just some kinda pay-back?
shudder
Rational decision making process as opposed to intuitive decision making process. I do not know why the City’s lawyer went down that path. Quite dangerous I think.
⢠Identify the problem or opportunity
⢠Gather relevant information
⢠Analyze the situation by finding alternative courses of action
⢠Develop the options
⢠Evaluate alternatives â what criteria should be used
⢠Select a preferred alternative based on risk analysis
⢠Act on the decision
Remind me how Mercier relates to this?
Sorry, Gus, none of of these were taken into account. Someone had a bright idea and steam-rolled. I still think that somebody has a stick up their bum in regard to this neighbourhood… Our former Mayor was dumb as a sack o hammers but there was nary a reason that those roads were paved before Parkridge.
“One could go on and on.”
Doubtless you will. Where would you have placed the facility?
Where would you have placed the facility?
In a place that would not jeopardize the neighbourhood’s fragile infrasture-mainly water supply.
“Where would you have placed the facility?” The fiberals have left a number of schools vacant. There is lots of raw land that such a facility could be built on. But that would cut their friends out of the money making process. What to do?
Gus – if the city would have met with the neighbourhood when the neighbourhood requested a neighbourhood meeting with the city some of decision making proccess you mention would have been answered. The Haldi group if I am not mistaken requested a meeting as 3 other neighbourhoods had their meetings with city hall. The Haldi group was shut down and told not until after the election….at these meetings input was given for their areas in regards to the OCP. To my knowledge the two parties have not met and it is already 6 months past the election…….
It seems more and more the citizens have to take on city hall with their arrogant attitude and father knows best approach.
City hall is doing its best to try and wear people down so they just give up in frustration. The citizens of PG have had enough of mayor and council’s high handed tactics and the revolt has just begun.
Best city hall concern themselves with the simpler things of life like patching and repairing what are considered the worst roads in Canada, and just maybe try listening to the city residents instead of inserting road blocks at every juncture..
Why does it state on the city’s website on the OCP page “Official Community Plan Bylaw 7281, 2001 …..In addition, all bylaws enacted or works undertaken by Council after adoption of an OCP must be consistent with the plan.” if the city lawyer says “He says consistency with the O.C.P. is very broad and says case law says that even if a by-law is in conflict with the O.C.P., council is still within its rights to enact the by-law.”
Are these not complete opposites?
Guessing this is one of the items the Haldi Residents noticed in the OCP? Don’t forget the OCP also has the words “reasonable” in it which can be taken “broadly”. LOL
When did the ruling come down on the squashing of the Victoria area facility?
Just wondering in regards to “case law”
Comments for this article are closed.