Four of five June 20 Sunshine Coast Regional District (SCRD) committee meeting business items made sideways rather than forward progress, with referrals requested before recommendations are finalized.
The Electoral Services committee asked for input on two items from the Area E (Elphinstone) Advisory Planning Commission (APC), from the Area B (Halfmoon Bay) APC on one and from the Policy Review Committee on another. One recommendation to the board, to endorse a renewal of its partnership with the Sunshine Coast Community Forest for operation of the Big Tree recreation site in Area B, was passed at the meeting.
‘Less industrial’ asked of Fortis
Issues related to Area E (Elphinstone), including requests for provincial Agricultural Land Commission permission to add soils at 437 Hough Road and for a development permit for Fortis Gas structures at 1020 Keith Road were requested to be placed on the APC’s June 25 meeting agenda. While those adjustments will require some fast background work from staff, director of planning Ian Hall stated at the meeting that it “was possible." He said that any APC comments made on the 25th could be routed through committee for board consideration before the elected officials take a break from meetings in August.
The proposed Fortis project “consists of seven small buildings and structures housing and protecting equipment required for the provision of natural gas services," according to the staff report on the meeting’s agenda. Area D director Kelly Backs stated he would like to see those structures look “less industrial." He referred to a Fortis facility at Highway 101 and Roberts Creek Road with displays a “photo wrap” of a forest scene as something to replicate at the Keith Road location.
Area E director Donna McMahon commented on the Hough Road matter, noting that area residents are appreciative of the efforts of the new owners of the subject property to make improvements. Despite that support, she requested, and the committee recommended referral to the APC for comment.
A recommendation to send a development variance permit application for construction of an auxiliary dwelling unit and pool at 7531 Cove Beach Road to the Area B (Halfmoon Bay) APC was also endorsed. The application asks to reduce the setback from the natural boundary of the ocean for those components to 7.5 from 15 metres and increase the lot coverage to 20.3 from 15 per cent of the parcel’s total area.
Indications of support for the application from owners of six adjacent properties and one statement in opposition from an area resident were part of the meeting’s agenda package.
Committee members noted that project, unlike the Fortis application, did not involve utility infrastructure. They stated any delay caused by a wait for APC review would impact only the applicant and not create an inconvenience to the general public.
Grant policy changes needed but not a priority
The final item the committee delayed making a recommendation on related to its rural grant in aid (GIA) process. A debriefing discussion on the 2024 GIA’s proceeded at the meeting and continued in an in camera session.
Before the group continued to closed discussions, Area A (Pender Harbour) director and Leonard Lee spoke to the community benefits created by the events and projects that rural GIAs provide. When it come to adjusting GIA processes to ensure the SCRD is abiding by provincial rules, he said the board had “unwittingly put our staff in a difficult position. Our task is to figure out how to do it right.”
But when it came to investing time in a debate on changing policy, he noted that had not been a board priority. He said “I am perfectly prepared to continue my inappropriate behaviour for next year, if necessary.”
A staff report on the agenda noted that since the audit of SCRD’s 2016 operations, the board had been advised to establish “clear policy and compliance with legislation” for GIA. The auditor’s observed some questionable GIA practices. Examples included funding organizations in multiple years for similar projects, covering the costs for items not eligible for grants, and funding projects outside of the local government’s mandate, in the areas such as social services.
In the accompanying staff report, it was noted “there has not been an additional SCRD service established to accommodate ongoing funding for programs or events. Often the interpretation is that the (GIA) Policy is the barrier, when in fact, the SCRD is bound by the Local Government Act, for example, ongoing funding to the same organization would require the establishment of a new 'service' for that purpose is required.”
