Bylaw Enforcement

Here is a long piece I wrote to give some background information about how we come to have a ten acre minimum subdivision size, a limit of one residence per parcel, an Official Community Plan, a Land Use Bylaw, zoning and bylaw enforcement.

Susan and I would like to know what people think of this. Is there a need for a community meeting, for exchange of information and concerns? Please contact one or both of us, by telephone or email or in person. Or you can send your comments and questions to our planner, Linda Prowse, at the Gabriola Trust office - lprowse [at] islandstrust [dot] bc [dot] ca 250-247-2220.

If there is interest, we will schedule a meeting. If not, we will discuss the subject at our next Local Trust Committee meeting on July 12. You can attend that meeting and let us know what you think, or you can write to us, or email us, or telephone us to let us know. We would like to hear from anyone with questions, concerns, ideas, etc.

Peter Johnston 250-333-8785 pjohnston [at] islandstrust [dot] bc [dot] ca
Susan Morrison 250-333-8589 smorrison [at] islandstrust [dot] bc [dot] ca

Lasqueti Bylaw Enforcement

I apologize for the length of this. It seems important to give the background/historical information, especially for those who are relatively new to Lasqueti, and for those who have been less involved in these aspects of Lasqueti community life.

Background

This history bit is from memory. I have not done extensive research on the exact dates and order of events. I think it is substantially correct. Please let me know if I've left out anything important, or got any of the important details wrong.

Nearly forty years ago the province introduced a “ten acre freeze” in the gulf islands area, and then a few years later created the Islands Trust as a way to stop over-development and give communities a say in their development. Communities on each major island had to decide some land use issues – specifically about minimum parcel subdivision sizes.

After many meetings, and completely as a compromise (some wanted larger pieces, some smaller; we could all live with the ten acres), the people of Lasqueti decided to keep the ten acre freeze, and that became the minimum size that any new property could be divided into.

At that time there was no distinction made between residential and commercial or industrial properties. Years later we decided to institute zoning for different (non-residential uses) on Lasqueti to rationalize what was taking place on some properties. Until we did this, nearly everything was permitted anywhere, except subdivision into parcels less than ten acres.

At one point we introduced into our Land Use Bylaw a limit of one residence per parcel (or one per 10 acres for larger parcels), because we wanted to hold to the ten-acre minimum lot principle and didn't want people to have more than one home or dwelling on their parcel. We felt that it was likely that a ten acre property would be able to provide the firewood, water, garden space and other resources that residents would need. We decided at that time to also permit one guest cottage for each permitted residence. The maximum size of a guest cottage was limited (to about 600 square feet). It was generally believed that guests don't pay rent, and that owners can't be guests. I believe that this came from a legal opinion or court judgment.

Over the years more sections and provisions were added to our Official Community Plan (OCP) and Land Use Bylaw (LUB), and changes were made. Many of these changes have been made during the periodic reviews of these documents that the community and the Lasqueti Trust Committee have undertaken. Some of the changes have been required by government. The last review of the OCP and LUB was done in 2006

Bylaw enforcement in the Trust area

Bylaw enforcement in the Trust area is undertaken largely when a complaint is filed, though sometimes when an infraction like Short Term Vacation Rentals in residential properties are advertised publicly the Bylaw enforcement staff initiate action. The Bylaw enforcement staff is two full-time and one part-time people and one part-time administrative assistant.

Bylaw enforcement is primarily concerned with having people comply with our bylaws. They bring an alleged non-compliance to the notice of the person concerned (usually the resident or landowner) and if there is an infraction, they ask the person to make changes and comply with the bylaw.

When this does not happen voluntarily, the only option has been to take the person to court and seek a court order requiring compliance, and usually, if the person is found at fault, to pay a fine and the court costs. This is a slow and expensive process. Judges and courts are already overburdened with important work. The Islands Trust Executive Committee, which has to approve and authorize spending funds for this level of enforcement, is confined to acting only on extreme cases.

To introduce a simpler and more local tool for Bylaw enforcement, the provincial government has issued an Order in Council authorizing Island Trust bodies, including all 13 Local Trust Committees, for the purpose of adopting a Bylaw Enforcement Notification (BEN) Bylaw.

This bylaw introduces a system where a bylaw enforcement officer can issue a ticket for an apparent infraction. This begins a much less formal and less expensive interaction between the person and the Islands Trust bylaw enforcement department.

It is the policy of the Trust that before a ticket is issued, the person involved will be approached and, if an apparent infraction is indeed taking place, will be asked to stop or remedy the infraction and comply with the bylaw within a certain amount of time. There will be, as I understand it, warning or information tickets issued before infraction tickets (Bylaw Violation Notice (BVN) with a penalty amount prescribed) are used.

A resident or landowner who receives a Bylaw Violation Notice has two options: pay the penalty indicated or dispute the ticket if they think it is incorrectly issued. If they pay the penalty, they will be asked to also comply with the bylaw. Paying the penalty isn't permission to keep on with an infraction.

Disputing the BVN has two levels: first, an appeal to a screening officer within the Islands Trust, who can, if they feel the BVN is not justified, cancel the BVN.

The second level, adjudication, is with an independent Registry located in North Vancouver, set up specifically to adjudicate cases involving Bylaw Violation Notices. The North Vancouver Registry is the closest one to the Islands Trust area. It is anticipated that there will not be nearly enough cases to justify setting up our own Registry. BVNs can be adjudicated in writing (by mail or fax), by telephone, or in person in North Vancouver.

The situation on Lasqueti

The Bylaw Enforcement Notification bylaw, with its schedule of possible infractions, is a look at our Land Use Bylaw from a completely different viewpoint. The schedule that's part of the Bylaw does not create any new offenses; it just lists those that are already in our Land Use Bylaw. It's how a bylaw enforcement officer sees our bylaw, and it is inherent in our bylaw. If we don't like what it looks like, we should change our Land Use Bylaw, or we can adopt local policies about bylaw enforcement.

Our OCP and LUB are generally supported and respected by Lasqueti residents and landowners. I have viewed them as a statement of the desires and wishes and expectations – in short, the agreement – of Lasqueti people. Seeing it as an actual bylaw that would be enforced by the Islands Trust staff has been a shift for me. I expect it will be for others, too.

At our meeting May 3, we gave the bylaw first reading, and decided to circulate notification about it to Lasqueti people, and post copies so that everyone could become aware of it. Both Susan and I would very much like to hear what you think about it – about the whole process of bylaw enforcement and about the details of this particular draft bylaw and other materials.

Joseph (above) asked these questions. Here are some answers:

1) how many bylaw enforcement cases on Lasqueti could not be resolved with warning notices and have ended up going to court?
and how many of those were decided in favour of the Trust?

I have been unable to find out how many complaints have been reported from or about Lasqueti, except that the answer is "very few". There is one still unresolved complaint about a guest house/residence situation, where there are apparently two residences on one parcel. The bylaw enforcement coordinator has written a report, essentially saying that our bylaw on this is not easily enforceable. It is posted on the Trust website at http://islandstrust.bc.ca/ltc/la/pdf/larptguestcabinsep022010.pdf
No Lasqueti cases have gone to the BC Supreme Court, as far as I know.

2) how will the Trust fund the extra bylaw enforcement work that will no doubt come with the BEN?

They say that there will be no extra work - that the BEN bylaw system will allow them to resolve most situations much more simply and easily. There is no plan to increase the budget or staff for bylaw enforcement. If there ever is, it would be funded, like almost everything else, by Trust area property taxpayers.

3) will the BEN be of any use to us in enforcing a parking bylaw (if we should ever draft one)?

Parking, except as a land use issue in our zoning, is not a Trust responsibility or area it can regulate. Highways owns and controls the roads, but does not provide or (except in extreme situations) control parking on road allowances. Powell River Regional District could pass parking bylaws for Lasqueti, and possibly there could be an Islands Trust/PRRD agreement that the Trust bylaw enforcement officers could do or help with the enforcement.

In my experience, if the community agrees what we'd like a bylaw to say, most people will comply most of the time.

Susan and I are planning to schedule a community information meeting on the BEN Bylaw topic, probably early in the second half of June. We hope to announce the date and time soon, and look forward to the discussion and exchange of ideas. Keep them coming until then, so we have more sense of the range of views and opinions.

The idea came from Trust Council, with trustees from all islands, but it is to be adopted - or not - by each island. As I understand it, each island can, if it adopts this, or a modification of this, bylaw, adopt policies about how specific parts of the bylaw are enforced. To me, it seems like modifying the attached schedule of contraventions and penalties is a much smarter thing to do. It seems silly (at best) to me to pass a bylaw and then pass another bylaw or policy about how it should be, or should not be, enforced.

Basically, the BEN process would create a dispute adjudication procedure that is much less onerous and expensive than the current only option (if negotiation with the landowner/tenant fails) of seeking a court order. The matter would be adjudicated by a much less formal and less intimidating/expensive/onerous process, by phone, in writing or in person in North Vancouver. (The reason it's N.Van is that they have the closest one already set up; the Trust doesn't anticipate having anywhere enough cases to set up our own.)

I don't think the new process would free up much bylaw enforcement time. If it does, the Trust would need to decide if the current people (2 full time, 2 part time) would work harder doing more enforcement, or reduce their hours spent on bylaw enforcement. I'd support the latter.

The main advantage of the BEN bylaw is that there is somewhere to go if negotiation with the landowner/tenant fails to achieve resolution or compliance. Often (though I don't know how often) the matter isn't major enough for the executive to authorize the expense of seeking a court order. In some cases - short term vacation rentals is one example - the situation on some islands was so much an issue that seeking a court order was approved. People were ordered to stop renting their residential properties for less than one month, and agencies were ordered to stop providing short-term rental services except where the appropriate zoning was in place.

We will be scheduling a public meeting on the BEN bylaw shortly after the middle of June. Everyone is welcome to bring their questions, concerns, suggestions, idease and comments.

Hope this is helpful. If not, please ask.