Planning West · is our opportunity to give ourselves a collective pat on the back. Here’s to you...

Planning West

by Joan Chess-Woollacott, MCIP

Fall is upon us already; the snow is half way down the mountains; and PIBC is as busy as ever. After a successful orientation and strategic plan-ning session in August, the new Council’s Strategic Plan for 2011 - 2013

has been developed and is now available on our website. Its ambitious—four key areas dealing with communications & outreach, professional development, making the case for professional planning and examining our governance. If you want to know what your Council is up to, or areas you might want to get involved with, have a look.

In early November, PIBC will once again gather to celebrate World Town Plan-ning Day, recognizing members with 25 years of professional membership, and welcoming the many new Full Members who have successfully completed the

special reception to honour Tony Dorcey FCIP, as he retires from UBC’s School of Community & Regional Planning after more than 30 years of teaching, re-search, professional involvement, and helping so many of us become successful practicing planners. It will literally be smooth sailing for Tony as he enjoys retirement on the waters of the world.

While the event is known as ‘World Town Planning Day’, I hope that you will take the opportunity to celebrate your work as a planner, whether it involves small towns, big cities, watersheds, regions, transportation, First Nations communities, housing, or many other planning specialties. We are an amazingly diverse group of professional colleagues and friends, working in the most geographically and culturally diverse province in the country, in a time of major global change. This is our opportunity to give ourselves a collective pat on the back. Here’s to you… cheers!

Professional Mentorship from Both Perspectives .............................................. 17

PIBC Council Notes ............................................ 20PIBC Council Orientation & Strategic Planning ............................................................. 20Membership Committee Report ....................... 22

Editor’s Note ........................................................ 3MetroVancouver Regional Growth Strategy ..... 3

Home, Home on the Lane ................................... 4Habitat ’76 Thirty-Five Years On ........................ 7Long Range Facilities Planning for School Districts .................................................. 10Canada’s First Zoning Bylaw ............................. 14

by Siobhan Murphy

Summer’s over and hopefully all of you got to take a little time and take advantage of the great

outdoors. I talked to planners who did all sorts of great things: slow food tours in the Fraser

Valley, cycling, camping trips and checking out public spaces in way off places. Also, there was

the CIP Conference in St. John’s this year in July, which you can read about in Plan Canada.

Scene: back to the grind! So here we are, with a range of stories for the BC planner’s palate.

-couver (it’s time has come!). Next is the importance of school facilities planning to ensure effectiveness over the long-term. I’ve also included a review of Canada’s First Zoning Bylaw, which happened right here in BC. Also, Don Alexander sub-

Correction: In the last issue of Planning West, there was an article about public art in selected Seattle neighbor-hoods. The author is Allyson Friesen, and the MCIP designation was inadvertently attached to her byline. Allyson is currently a provisional member of PIBC. Apologies for the misprint.

by Laura Lee Richard, MCIP

There were those who thought it couldn’t be done, but with Johnny Carline’s persistent guidance, the dedication of Metro

and—eventually—the unanimous consent of affected local gov-ernments (20 member municipalities, 1 First Nation, 2 adjoin-

has a new Regional Growth Strategy: Metro Vancouver 2040 – Shaping our Future.

This was a reason to celebrate, which municipal planning di-rectors did after observing the Board adopt the resolution at its meeting held on July 29, 2011.

have. There is also an article on the importance of Mentorship and the status of the Mentorship Program. And, I’ve included a

-gion on the adoption of the Regional Growth Strategy. We will have more on the Regional Growth Strategy in future issues.

Four great things about Vancouver’s laneway houses

by Kamala Rao, MCIPEditor’s Note: The article originally appeared on the Sightline Daily, the Sightline Institute’s blog.

There’s an alley renaissance going on around the world. It was born of a renewed love for

urbanity that came along with the droves of young, artistic types shunning the ‘burbs and re-

populating North America’s inner cities. They brought with them a desire to turn what have

traditionally been neglected and ugly inner-city dumping grounds into vibrant, art-adorned,

pedestrian-friendly public spaces.

for creating liveable inner cities—is having its own “laneway”

the revival was spawned by sky-high real estate prices, a lack of affordable housing, and a plan to create ‘hidden density’ in the city’s most desirable single-family neighbourhoods. Where-as some might see these underutilized swaths of pavement as

-portunity to provide badly-needed rental units.

Laneway homes are basically miniature versions of single-family homes—in the range of 500 to 1,000 square feet—that are built in what has traditionally been the garage location of a single-family lot: in the backyard facing the lane. They can’t be sub-divided or sold separately from the main house on the lot. They can only be used for additional family space

estate market was part of the larger “Eco-Density Initiative” invented by former mayor Sam Sullivan and championed by current mayor, Gregor Robertson. The intention is to “help reduce [the city’s] carbon footprint, expand housing choices,

in the world.”

Here are four reasons why laneway houses are such a great housing option:

1. They add hidden density to single-family neighbourhoodsThe concept of “laneway housing,” is actually quite ingenious. Think about it: what other city has successfully added density

$1 million-plus homes? The very thought of it conjures up im--

ing and effective outreach smoothed the roll-out of its laneway housing bylaw, keeping NIMBY opposition to a minimum.

First of all, the city chose a good name. The term “Eco-Density”

compact communities, while neutralizing many of the concerns

single-family neighbourhood.

Secondly, the City knew that adding density the traditional way—by “up-zoning” to allow for multi-family dwellings—was going to be a non-starter in these tony neighbourhoods. In light of the great condo boom of the last two decades, the City saw the value in preserving the remaining single-family housing stock. Because no matter how much you recognize

First laneway house in Vancouver. Photo courtesy of Krista Jahnke.

(continued next page)

want to see these beautiful, traditional neighbourhoods—with their lovingly refurbished, turn-of-the-century homes and tree-lined streets—destroyed to make room for more glass-and-concrete towers.

The goal was to densify single-family neighbourhoods with-out affecting their character; so the density needed to be rela-tively invisible with no impact on the curb appeal of these long-established and highly-sought after neighbourhoods. They had already legalized basement rental suites—the most invisible form of increased density—but were bold and com-mitted enough to ask themselves if they had actually done all they could do to increase housing options in the least dense parts of the city.

Thus, laneway housing was born. The bylaw that gave birth to the concept was passed in July 2009 and less than a year later, one hundred of these pint-sized backyard homes had been per-mitted. Today, they are becoming a relatively common sight in

2. They’re greenSince World War II, our homes have gotten successively bigger, consuming a large amount of resources to build, furnish, heat and cool. Of course, the smaller your home, the less energy and resources it consumes. Laneway homes, by virtue of their size,

one builder of laneway homes is taking it a step further to see just how green these homes can be.

fabricated, ultra-insulated panels (R-40, for those of you well-versed in green building standards). They also use small,

-tional solar panels, wind turbines and rainwater collection, in order to make these green little houses even greener. Lanefab

-ing that it will collect all of the energy it consumes via solar

design features.

3. They provide a new housing option for those who can’t afford Vancouver’s high housing pricesMost of the public conversation about laneway housing has centered on sustainability and boosting the rental housing stock. But I wondered what it was like to actually live in one of these backyard micro-homes. After all, they really are a rare type of housing: a free-standing structure the size and cost of

him, he’d been living there for over a year.

Mathew—a designer himself—appreciated the modern design of the tiny home from the moment he saw it and knew he

-cally have two options: to live in an old house that’s been cut up into apartments and probably not very well kept up over the years, or to live in a condo, but this is completely different. It’s the same price and modern design as a new condo, but I have a whole house. There’s no one above or be-low me and I have direct access to the outside.” As Mathew pointed out, laneway houses allow people who can’t afford

detached home price now above $800,000) to have their own little piece of land.

When I asked Mathew if it was challenging living in such a small house—which he shares with his brother and most nights,

question to answer. He doesn’t feel like the space, which is just over 700 square feet, is small. “The house is so well-designed, it makes it easy to live in a small space. Hopefully the creation of smaller housing like this will help us as a society to re-focus on good design versus just creating unnecessarily large, cookie cutter spaces.”

Good point: as our urban populations grow and densify, urban land becomes more scarce—and the price of all the resources it takes to build and power a home continue to climb—laneway housing can indeed be a model for living well within a con-strained future.

Rendering of the ‘net-zero’ laneway house. Note the solar panels on the roof. Photo courtesy of Lanefab.

Laneway (cont’d)


4. They’re visually attractive and downright livableThese images show a range of laneway houses and their features.

Laneway (cont’d)

Images, clockwise from top left:

A view of a laneway home in Vancouver’s west side, from the owner’s backyard. This home is being rented out by the owners as a vacation rental at $300/night.

Floor plans for the same west side lane-way home, featuring an open concept living, dining and kitchen area.

“Lanescaping”—the City requires land-scaping on the lane side of the home.

Two interior views of the same west side laneway home.

(Images courtesy of Lanefab.)

Kamala Rao, MCIP, is a Senior Planner at TransLink and a Sightline board member. Her husband, Bryn Davidson, is co-owner of Lanefab Design/Build, a company that specializes in laneway housing.

Ground Floor

2nd Floor

A Milestone Event On The West Coast:

by Don Alexander, MCIPNOTE: This article relies heavily on research conducted by Vancouver writer, artist and activist Lindsay Brown. For more informa-tion, see the end of the article.

-

icy worldwide, and yet most planners know little about it. Until recently, I would count myself

amongst them. The conference was Habitat ’76, usually known as Habitat I in light of the fact

that it was followed by Habitat II in Istanbul in 1996, the World Urban Forum (3) in Vancouver

in 2006, and the World Urban Forum (4) in Nanjing in 2008.

-ference – the UN-Habitat Conference on Human Settlements – was held under tight security at the Queen Elizabeth The-atre and other venues downtown. The second, the Habitat Fo-rum, attended by citizens and non-government organizations

former army/ navy base at Jericho Beach Park. This people’s forum, consisted of displays on urban and architectural themes, information booths/ literature tables, lectures, public forums, performances, and the world’s longest stand-up bar. Those who attended have described it as having been a “giant party.”

Featured speakers included Buckminster Fuller, Paolo Soleri of Arcosanti fame, Barbara Ward, Margaret Mead, Mother Theresa,

attended as it was seen as where the ‘real action’ was occurring, and where they could mingle with citizens and NGOs. To Pierre Trudeau’s and the UN organizers’ dismay, the main conference

the Palestine Liberation Organization and those of Israel, which distracted attention away from the main intended topics: the burning need for provision of clean water and other urban in-frastructure, the need for decent shelter, urban energy and waste issues, and other problems associated with human settlement and rapid urban growth, particularly in developing countries.

The conference and the forum were in many ways outgrowths of the 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm.i At that conference, two things became evident – that it was essential to consider cities and the environment through a common lens, and that NGOs and citizens needed to be better represented at such global events.

The Canadian government offered to host Habitat ’76, the larg-est UN conference to date, and – through Trudeau’s personal

-couver. The federal government provided approximately $11 million in total funding, with $1 million going to the forum itself, much of it in job training grants. Trudeau saw the impor-tance of the issues that the conference intended to address, and perhaps was additionally motivated by the energy crisis, then at its peak, given how central cities were and are from an energy consumption perspective.

Despite having a progressive City Council and civic administra-tion at the time, the City’s response was lukewarm at best. There was undoubtedly concern about the potential security threats,

addition, the Park Board, under conservative leadership, didn’t take kindly to the organizers of the forum (who were perceived as a “bunch of hippies”) taking over a major West Side park.

--

sion for saving old industrial buildings, particularly for use by artists. Clapp and his colleagues noted the similarity in form between the hangars and traditional West Coast longhouses. Clapp traded on his connections with both Trudeau and Dave Barrett, NDP premier of the province at the time, to have Jeri-cho Park and the hangars selected as the site for the forum.

Once secured, they solicited the assistance of many architects, artists and others, and convinced Bill Reid, prominent Haida artist, to do a mural on the outside of the theatre hangar in-tended for performances, and to create a design for a banner developed by fabric artist, Evelyn Roth, and her team to hang from the ceiling of the inside of the Plenary Hall. As author/ activist Rex Weyler remembers, “Al was paying nearly every


move that was way ahead of its time, the builders relied on salvage logs (including from Jericho Beach) that they milled on site using a portable mill supplied by Dave Barrett.

plenary hall, the social centre (including the bar), and the the-atre workshop building. What is now the Jericho Sailing Club served as the press centre. Pat Canning remembers: “The build-ings were quite lovely – breathing, shaking slightly in the wind off the bay, animated with our ideas and excitement.” Though artists were allowed to use one of the buildings for a few years after the conference, the Park Board ordered the demolition of the hangars in 1980, including Bill Reid’s mural, in what can only be described as a deliberate act of civic vandalism.

After the forum, artists had envisioned the buildings’ ongoing use as a venue for an artists’ community. However, the Park Board at the time cited liability issues. Canning suggests that the forum had been “an in-your-face example that there was another way of delivering recreation services. The Park Board was fearful those structures would become desirable places to conduct activities of which they disapproved.”

At the time of the conference, when two-thirds of the world’s population was still living in rural areas, and issues of rural development remained a predominant focus, the UN had no agency addressing the problems of human settlement and ur-banization. However, as Barbara Ward presciently wrote at the time: “mankind is engaged in a kind of race for survival, be-tween the inner and outer boundaries of social pressures and physical constraints, while the doubling of population [also noted by Trudeau in his speech] and emerging of a half-urban world takes place. These overlapping contexts of violent de-mographic, social, and environmental change all meet – one could say collide – in human settlements.” As a result of the

Habitat agency was established in 1978.

Outside of the establishment of the UN agency, a major accom-plishment, the conference’s international and national impact is harder to gauge. The University of British Columbia’s Centre for Human Settlements was established as a direct legacy of the conference under the guiding hand of Peter Oberlander, who was also a major participant in Habitat I and subsequent UN-Habitat conferences. Another effect may have been felt through a walking tour conducted by Hayne Wai, as a representative of the Strathcona neighbourhood, who took delegates through the community to highlight the Strathcona Rehabilitation Project,

a prototype for the federal Neighbourhood Improvement Pro-gram (NIP) and Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP). Local activists were encouraged by the praise they re-ceived from delegates for their pioneering work that sought an alternative to the wholesale demolition of communities through “urban renewal.”

-adell, organized Festival Habitat, a performing arts event to oc-

-rum has been described by Rex Weyler as a “mini-Renaissance.” Country Joe MacDonald (of Country Joe and the Fish fame) was one of the performers. The festival was enormously popular, and the unexpected surplus of $40,000 provided the means to initi-ate an ongoing, though short-lived, Heritage Festival, which in

Children’s Festival, both of which are still going strong.

However, in other respects, Habitat I, especially the forum’s, impact seems to have been rather muted. Lindsay Brown specu-lates that this may have been for a number of reasons. First, in addition to the dozens of individuals who received job training working on the Forum, it also required the volunteer efforts of hundreds of organizers to pull it off. They worked extremely hard, and the result was massive burnout. Secondly, while the

-where, 1976 was its last gasp in many ways.ii

neighbourhood of South False Creek, and in the construction of housing co-ops, 1976 also saw the re-emergence of the right-of-centre Non-Partisan Association (NPA) as a major force on

in 1978. In addition, the Social Credit Party, under Bill Ben-nett, recaptured the provincial government in 1975 from the NDP, but after the arrangements for Habitat had been made, and the Socreds were to remain in power until 1991.iii Political and social conservatism became the order of the day. As Weyler says, there was a “backlash” against the counter-culture, and the demolition of the forum structures left artists and activ-ists “heartbroken.” With the buildings having been demolished, there was no physical focus for remembrance.

But another issue lacking clarity is why the impact of the con-ference seems to have had a relatively small impact on plan-

the partial stillbirth of the main conference may have been one factor, but another may have been the relative parochialism of North American planners who had not, with notable excep-tions, taken seriously problems of ‘Third World’ urbanization or seen them as having much relevance to North American condi-tions. If true, this is somewhat ironic in that we now pay hom-


Habitat (cont’d)

age to the revolutionary work of Enrique Peñalosa in Bogotá and Jaime Lerner in Curitiba, where much policy and on-the-ground planning surpasses our own. In fact, Peñalosa’s father, who was the UN’s representative to the conference, gave by all accounts a stirring speech to the assembled delegates, noting that, in his country, 90% of all housing was constructed, not by the government or by the private sector, but by the poor them-selves – often against the law.

Just as the ‘two solitudes’ of environment and social justice, so

being breached after many decades, so too are the experiences and realms of the ‘developed’ and ‘developing’ world. Fortu-nately, the planning community was well-represented at the

tandem with the World Planners’ Congress just a block away.

While Habitat ’76 has been forgotten by many, this urban am-nesia need not remain a permanent condition. To further aware-ness of the Habitat Forum in particular, Lindsay Brown has es-

Habitat (cont’d) tablished a web site with articles, news of activities, and video clips [see http://habitat76.ca], and is preparing a book to ana-lyze and commemorate the event. If you would like more infor-mation, please contact her at: [email protected].

Don Alexander is a professor in Geography and Urban Planning at Vancouver Island University, and writes extensively about smart growth, urban sustainability, and place-making.

i Barbara Ward was a guiding light for the Stockholm conference through her book (with René Dubos), Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet, which was commissioned by Maurice Strong, secretary-general for the conference. The now deceased urbanist and development economist, has large-ly been forgotten by the planning community. However, she also wrote The Home of Man which was the keynote document for the delegates at Habitat I.

ii The day after the end of the conference, Greenpeace launched its second anti-whaling campaign from the Jericho wharf, with the Habitat buildings as a backdrop.

iii Though most of the arrangements had already been made, Bennett remained

to secure liability insurance.

2012 Conferenceplanning on the edge of changeMay 29 – June 1, 2012Harrison Hot Springs Resort

The PIBC 2012 Conference Program Committee seeks proposals for presentations, panel discussions, debates, papers, workshops, media and other forms of engagement – including mobile workshops, demonstration site tours, and more – that explore the many dimensions of the game changers which are affecting communities and regions across British Columbia, the Yukon and beyond…

Deadline for Proposals: Visit:

by Bill Low, MCIP

The British Columbia Ministry of Education has, since 2009, required school districts to develop and maintain a comprehensive School District Facilities Plan (SDFP). The Ministry stated: Under the planning and procurement process, boards of education must develop long-range facility plans that support capital projects being submitted to the Ministry for capital investment consideration.

These facility plans must identify capital require-ments for school expansion and consolidation; school replacement or upgrades based on build-ing condition, seismic vulnerability and ongo-ing maintenance/life cycle costs; as well as new government initiatives. Such plans should take into consideration education program require-ments and trends, operating capacities and cur-rent condition of existing facilities, current land use, anticipated changes in land use, absorption rates, yield rates, community demographics, lo-cal community and economic development strat-egies, and other considerations.

The SDFP would provide a comprehensive ra-

plan. In addition, the SDFP provides a district-wide framework for other key local decisions such as school consolidations, locations for dis-trict programs and maintenance priorities. The SDFP should outline concrete plans for a ten-year planning horizon with more general consid-eration for the longer term.

School District facilities planning is driven by school-age population growth or decline, and migration. For many years, population growth was a given and with that population growth there was always school enrolment growth. How-ever, for nearly a decade, enrolment has declined in school districts, due to reduced in-migration to British Columbia, a lower birth rate, and de-layed marriage and child-bearing by the new


Left: Figure 1: Enrolment trends within Canada

Below: Figure 2: Example of Facility Planning During Growth Years

generation of young adults. This decline has been exacerbated by the increasing number of private, ethnic, and religious schools offering alternatives to the public school system. In many areas, the enrolment has grown in these alternative schools while it decreases in the public schools.

The Enrollment Growth Years In the 1990’s, developing Long-range Facil-ity Plans was a matter of continuing the exist-ing enrolment growth trend out for 10 or more years by neighbourhood, and determining the need for facility changes to handle the anticipated growth. These changes might include school ad-ditions, renovations, grade structure changes (for example, changing from elementary-secondary to elementary-middle-secondary), and new schools.

-tions in growth rates from neighbourhood to neighbourhood. As well, decisions such as expand-ing and renovating an old school versus building a new one quickly attracted public interest and sometimes controversy. Most readers are aware for example of the debate that arises when low enrol-ment leads to a recommendation that an old school close. Nevertheless, expanding the student capacity in a district was a lot easier and more fun than what has been happening in the most recent decade It is a lot more satisfying going to a public meeting to get neighbourhood input on the features of a proposed new school than it is to get feedback on the impact of a proposed school closing.

In the table below, a growing district has to plan its future facilities to accommodate additional el-ementary students in its two zones: north and south. In this simple example, we are not allowed to con-sider changing the existing Kindergarten to Grade 5

the grouping of which elementary schools feed into which middle schools.

However, we are allowed to recommend school catchment boundary changes to avoid having more than one addition or new school in the zone. Bound-ary changes themselves require a planning study

and natural boundaries (e.g. ravines, streams, dense forest, railroads, and highways). Interest groups such as the Parent Advisory Councils of affected

schools, organizations that use the school after hours, and municipal rec-reation departments also want input into proposed changes. Some parent groups will add non-physical considerations such as wanting to keep ho-mogeneity in their school culture by not introducing students from “the other school area”.

In this simple example, with both zones growing in population, the long range facility plan recommends a school addition in the North Zone and a new elementary school in the South Zone, with catchment boundary ad-justments in both zones. As can be seen in the far right yellow column, the boundary adjustments possible in the South Zone are able to keep enrol-ment close to school capacities.

Schools (cont’d)


Above: Figure 3: Example of Planning for Growth and Decline in the 1990s

Below: Figure 4: Population Pyramid (2006) for British Columbia

In larger districts, even with the easier challenge in the 1990’s of planning for growth, the plan could be-come quite complicated. Population growth typically occurred in the areas of new subdivisions while older neighbourhoods matured and lost school-aged popu-lations. Many school districts had to consider closing city schools while building new suburban schools. On a macro level, there was enough space but it was not located near the new student population areas.

In the example below, student enrolment is growing rapidly in the northern and eastern suburbs, but de-clining in the downtown zone. The district only has a middle school in the eastern suburbs and those students go to the secondary school in the north. As part of its long-range facility plan, the district will accommodate growth in the east by building new elementary schools in the new subdivisions and new middle school and sec-ondary space. However, the secondary population will not be enough for a stand-alone secondary school, so the plan calls for a new combined middle/secondary school. This will relieve the overcrowding at Second-ary North so it can handle the growth occurring in the northern suburbs. At the same time, the district has to close two under-enrolled elementary schools in the City Centre zone. The planner has to consider all the permu-tations of new schools, additions, closures, and changes to the feeder school organization to address demograph-ic changes forecast for the next ten or more years.

The Enrollment Decline Years As discussed earlier, enrolment growth turned into en-rolment decline about ten years ago. Across North America, school districts were wrestling with the impact of the Echo Baby Boom (children of boomers) moving out of elementary grades and then out of secondary school. This little demograph-ic bulge moved on into the post-secondary institutions creating for them a mini building boom.

In the recent past, only a handful of the 60 school districts in British Columbia have experienced enrolment growth. These

schools declined by more than 56,000 students between 2000 and 2009, according to the Ministry of Education. The Centre for Civic Governance, quoting BC Teachers’ Federation data, says that 44 of the school districts have closed 176 schools since 2002.

makeup of the province in 2006. The top bulge, around age 50, is the Baby Boomer generation and the second bulge, around

age 18, is the Echo Baby Boom. The latter was on its way out of the public school system. Below that is the much smaller cohort of pre-school and elementary aged children.

This change to a declining enrolment scenario, combined with pockets of growth in new suburban subdivisions attracting young families complicated the planner’s task in developing long-range facilities plans for school districts. Invariably the need for new space was never located in neighbourhoods close to schools with surplus space. The plan had to include school closure recommendations as well as addressing any parts of the school district needing additional space. Even options of busing children from one catchment to another catchment to make use of surplus space had to be considered, and if feasible in terms of travel time and cost, factored into the plan.

Consolidation at the secondary school level (merging two half-


Schools (cont’d)

Above: Figure 5: A British Columbia Rural School District Consolidates Secondary Schools

Left: Figure 6: Rising Fertility Rates 2004-2010

Source: BC Stats

to consider in quite a few districts. Since, in most districts in the province, secondary students already travel by bus from sur-rounding communities, consolidating secondary schools is not as stressful on a district as consolidating or closing elementary

be closed. This results in all of the feeder elementary students being sent to Urban Secondary A to increase its enrolment closer to capacity and re-invigorate the district’s ability to offer optional courses and senior sports programs.

Interestingly, the decline in school aged children is about to reverse itself. The early edge of the Echo Baby Boomers are now having babies, and the smaller cohort in between the two boomer bulges, which delayed child-bearing into their mid and late thirties, are also having babies. A baby boom starting in 2008 will start to impact elementary schools in 2013. Then for the following years, there will be increasing numbers in the lower grades while the higher grades will continue to decline.

School district facility planners have to now plan ahead for in-creased kindergarten and primary grade space requirements. Those

Unfortunately the incoming tide will take another decade be-

have to continue addressing shrinking secondary enrolments throughout the period of 2010 through to 2020.

Conclusion What should school district facility planners recommend now? It would be wise to keep elementary facilities that are in reason-able condition. Even if the district must close the school down for a few years, there will be a need for the facility in the future. If the school is worth keeping, the district shouldn’t sell it or de-molish it, but retain it in inventory as a closed facility, use it for district storage or programs or lease the space for another use.

Schools (cont’d)

Planning, Development & Environmental Law

Practical Advice, Creative Options, Value for Local Government

Lui Carvello, MCIP

Lawyer & Planner

1265 Oscar Street

Victoria, BC V8V 2X6

CARVELLOLAWCORPORATION

(250) 686-‐‑9918

[email protected]

At the secondary level, tougher decisions are required to cope with the continuing decline in student populations. A district with more than one secondary school needs to consider consol-idating them to maintain viable student populations and appro-

to consider introducing lower grades (Grade 6 for example) into the school, or combining it with a nearby elementary to create an Elementary-Secondary (K-12) School. Within under-enrolled facilities, the planner should determine if a section or wing of the school could be closed off and decommissioned to save on maintenance and utility costs. It is probable that sur-plus secondary facilities are to be so for the next 15 – 20 years, so it is unlikely that retaining the building for future secondary school use is a viable option for the district.

The challenge of school facility planning varies over time but never diminishes; and the solutions are not transparent. The plan must be based on the best available data today, but al-low for future adjustment as the population trends, educational programs, and technologies change. The most important aspect for school facility planning is to identify the necessary infra-structure changes over the next decade to accommodate the future enrolments, programs, and educational practices.

Figure 7

Legal Update

by Bill Buholzer, FCIP

During a recent municipal law conference in Toronto I attend-ed a presentation by an Ontario colleague dealing with early

zoning bylaw was passed in that province. The presentation -

that the bylaw dealt with in that case, the Point Grey town planning bylaw, had been adopted a couple of years before the earliest Ontario zoning bylaw my colleague had found. I also recalled that Hal Kalman’s excellent reference work A History of Canadian Architecture (the original two-volume edition) mentions in the chapter on Town Planning that the

-ver I re-read the old zoning case, and obtained a copy of the

across, in Harland Bartholomew and Associates’ 1929 plan

as “the most comprehensive of such regulations passed up to that time anywhere in Canada”. This article looks at some of

1926 land use dispute.

Point Grey’s Town Planning BylawThe land comprising the Point Grey peninsula had a brief existence as a municipality, seceding from the municipality

-

-

boundaries of Point Grey extended east as far as Cambie Street south of 16th Avenue, and as far as Alma Road north of 16th, and included the area now comprising the Univer-sity Endowment Lands. The municipality’s Town Planning Bylaw was adopted on September 5, 1922, three years before the adoption of the Town Planning Act (the ancestor to Part 26 of the Local Government Act), and was seventeen sections long, about three pages.

The bylaw was enacted under s. 54(250) of the Municipal Act, which gave the municipal council the power to make bylaws “for preserving areas within which no buildings shall be erect-ed for any purpose other than that of a private dwelling-house either with or without stables, private garages, coach-houses,

greenhouses, and necessary outbuildings”. These powers were located, under the subheading “Miscellaneous”, at the end of a very lengthy list of municipal bylaw-making powers along

on any street or road”, “for limiting the number of separate dwelling-houses to the acre”, “for prohibiting within any pre-scribed area the erection of factories, warehouses, public ga-rages, shops and stores”, and “for prohibiting the carrying on of any noxious trades or manufactures, and the erection and use of any building with inadequate sanitary arrange-ments”. There was also an interesting power “for approving and making compulsory schemes governing the development

have been approved by a majority of not less than three-fourths in number and value of the owners of the property within the area in which the scheme is to apply”. Charming

use regulation tools to be forged in British Columbia. Other miscellaneous powers of interest to planners were those “for establishing and maintaining landmarks” and “for preventing the destruction of trees”.

The Point Grey Town Planning Bylaw divided the municipality into residential, commercial and industrial areas, the latter be-ing coloured red and yellow respectively on the plan attached to the bylaw and the residential areas being uncoloured, and did not restrict land uses within the industrial areas, except for a general prohibition throughout the municipality of noxious or dangerous manufacture and buildings with inadequate sani-tary arrangements. Within the residential areas, Section 4 of the bylaw prohibited (in a rather run-on sentence that was to cause some interpretation problems in Mrs. Carrick’s case) the erection and maintenance of buildings other than:

1. private dwelling houses with or without stables, private ga-rages, coach houses, green houses and necessary outbuild-ings

-cian, surgeon, lawyer, dentist, artist or musician

3. a church, school, library, public museum, philanthropic or eleemosynary institution other than a correctional institu-tion, railway passenger station, nursery, greenhouse, barn, farm building or club


Section 5 of the bylaw prohibited the erection, maintenance and occupancy of a factory or warehouse in residential and commercial areas. Section 6 prohibited the erection of a public garage, public stable, shop or store, or any apartment or tene-ment house in residential areas. Thus it can be seen that the council was attempting to exercise almost all of its “miscel-laneous” bylaw-making powers in relation to town planning, principally with the objective of maintaining the sanctity of residential areas. The bylaw was also concerned with building setbacks, establishing minimum front lot line setbacks of 20 percent of lot depth in residential areas, and in commercial areas a building line 40 feet from the centreline of the abut-ting street.

In the absence of detailed zoning enabling legislation, the Point Grey town planning bylaw contained its own provisions regarding the continuation of existing uses and buildings that did not comply with the bylaw. In residential zones, buildings other than dwelling houses that pre-dated the bylaw “shall not alter such district” but the land use restrictions and building lines must be adhered to in all future buildings and structures. Non-conforming buildings in all zones could not be enlarged, extended, reconstructed or structurally altered unless altered so as to comply with the bylaw. Non-conforming buildings

the extent of 75 per cent of its assessed value” could not be repaired or rebuilt except for a use permitted by the bylaw. There are obvious similarities between these bylaw provisions and what is now s. 911 of the Local Government Act.

In what is, to a municipal lawyer, the most novel provision of the 1922 bylaw, the Point Grey council reserved to itself in section 14 the power, by a 2/3 vote of the whole council, to “waive compliance with any of the provisions of this By-law on good cause being shown”, and to “determine any dispute arising out of the provisions of this By-law”. The council thus gave itself the powers now exercised, albeit in relation to a very limited range of regulations and on the basis of hardship only, by the board of variance. Contemporary municipal law principles have little tolerance for regulatory schemes that re-serve to the municipal council the authority to waive bylaw compliance on a case-by-case basis, such discretion generally being considered a recipe for improper discrimination.

The Point Grey bylaw contained some powerful, and by con-temporary standards draconian, enforcement powers. If any owner failed to “pull down and remove” any building contra-

notice by the Municipal Engineer or Building Inspector, the Municipality was empowered to pull it down at the owner’s expense and add the cost to the taxes on the owner’s land,

with interest at 8 per cent per annum. This procedure would likely have considerable appeal to a lot of B.C. municipalities and regional districts today, in that they would now have to obtain a mandatory injunction from the B.C. Supreme Court to force an owner to remove a building that contravenes a zoning bylaw, and then attempt to recover the costs in fur-ther litigation rather than simply adding them to the property tax bill.

Mrs. Carrick’s CaseIn 1926 a Mrs. Carrick attacked the validity of the Point Grey town planning bylaw in the B.C. Supreme Court. Mrs. Carrick wished to construct a gasoline service station and store in a designated residential area (in the vicinity of 49th Avenue and West Boulevard close to today’s Magee Grocery Store) and had been refused permission on the grounds that the Town Planning Bylaw prohibited such a use of the land in a desig-nated residential area. In the B.C. Supreme Court, Mr. Justice

-ceeds in its scope the statute from which it derives its author-ity”, and the principal issue for argument before the Court was whether the invalid parts of the bylaw could be severed from the valid parts. Despite the fact that section 6 of the bylaw seemed to pretty clearly prohibit Mrs. Carrick’s proposed use, the Court focused its attention on the validity of section 4 and the severability of its invalid portions. The main problem with that section, as the Court saw it and as the municipal-ity’s legal counsel appears to have largely conceded, was that it permitted in residential areas a broad range of uses—those non-residential uses listed above in points 2 and 3—as well as the residential uses listed in point 1, which were the uses mentioned in section 54(250) of the Municipal Act.

In other words, if the council chose to exercise its power to preserve areas for “private dwelling-houses”, it was obliged by the wording of the enabling legislation to exclude all non-residential uses from those areas. The Point Grey council had, as was pointed out in the Court of Appeal by Mr. Justice Mac-donald, one of the Justices who agreed that the entire bylaw was invalid, applied a “residential area” designation to some 20 or 25 square miles of its territory, from which “no sane council” would think of excluding all non-residential build-ings, instead of selecting exclusively residential areas for the exercise of this novel power. Possibly the council had been motivated by a desire to avoid non-conforming status for ex-isting non-residential uses that were of a more benign na-ture, in particular the home occupations and institutional uses

almost a century before planners began to favour “mixed-use” zoning, to countenance a limited range of new non-residential

Legal Update (cont’d)


in s. 4 of the bylaw. Whatever the reasoning lying behind its enactment, four of the six Justices ultimately involved in the case were of the view that section 4 of the bylaw was plainly not authorized by the Municipal Act, the invalid part of the section could not be severed from the rest of the bylaw, and the entire bylaw was therefore invalid. Mrs. Carrick was pre-sumably given her building permit.

The reasons for judgment of some of the Justices in the Court of Appeal provide some interesting insight into the attitudes of early 20th-century judges towards local government land use control. Mr. Justice McPhillips, who did not agree that the bylaw was invalid, was clearly aware of the basic ratio-nale for zoning enabling legislation, remarking that it was “vital that it be not permissible to invade residential areas with obnoxious erections and businesses, as it may not be always possible to cope with these invasions upon the ground that they are nuisances”. He noted that municipalities “have grave duties and must see to it that there be all proper safe-guards in town planning and the preservation of residential areas and that there be inhibition against other than the de-sired residential occupation. Were this not done it would be

to the residents in the areas covered by the by-law.”

Mr. Justice Macdonald, who thought the bylaw invalid, com-mented in relation to section 4 that “the language of the

in restraint of property rights should be reasonably explicit”. Noting as well that under the bylaw no person was permitted to “erect or maintain” any but the permitted types of build-ings, Mr. Justice Macdonald pointed out that the enabling legislation referred only to prescribing areas within which no buildings shall be “erected” other than those permitted, clearly troubled that the bylaw appeared (in its use of the term “maintain”) to have retroactive effect in its application

council had made in the bylaw to mitigate such retroactive effect. At the same time, it seems surprising that none of the members of the Court commented on the validity of section 14 of the bylaw, the “palm tree justice” provision empower-ing the council to vary the bylaw on a case-by-case basis on

Planners who have been involved in zoning bylaw enforce-ment will likely recognize the manner in which the courts carefully parsed the enabling legislation, in this case a simple power to create exclusive residential districts, to determine whether a municipal bylaw that was under attack was within the council’s powers. By the time the Court of Appeal had

given its judgment in the case, the Legislature had enacted the 1925 Town Planning Act, with its much more broadly-worded municipal power to divide the municipality into dis-tricts for the purpose of “designating certain districts within which it shall be lawful and certain other districts within which it shall be unlawful to erect, construct, alter, recon-struct, repair or maintain certain buildings, or to carry on certain businesses, trades or callings”. Note the inclusion of the word “maintain”; the Town Planning Act contained the essentials of what is now s. 911 of the Local Government Act, protecting existing uses and buildings lawfully under con-struction from the effects of a zoning bylaw but subject to the discontinuance rule. The Act also required the establishment of a zoning board of appeal.

AfterwardsThe Town Planning Act was given Royal Assent on Decem-ber 19, 1925. On the same day, Royal Assent was given to an interesting minor amendment to s. 54(250) of the Munici-pal Act, the bylaw-making power that the Point Grey council had exercised three years earlier. (Mrs. Carrick’s case was not heard in the B.C. Supreme Court until almost a year later.) This common-sense amendment, which perfectly anticipated the literal manner in which the courts would interpret the legisla-tion, enabled municipal councils to exercise their powers to designate exclusively residential areas so as not to exclude churches and schools from those areas. It did not go nearly as far as the Point Grey council would perhaps have liked, by allowing them to permit in such areas certain types of home occupations and other uses not terribly incompatible with residential uses.

The municipality of Point Grey enacted a new zoning bylaw pursuant to the Town Planning Act in 1927, and soon thereaf-ter Harland Bartholomew and Associates were closely analys-ing the differences between that bylaw and the zoning bylaws

a comprehensive zoning bylaw for the newly amalgamated

Archival research for this article was done by Jeannette Hlavach, MCIP.

Legal Update (cont’d)

Good Karma – Professional Mentorship in a Changing Profession

by John Steil FCIP and Patrick Coates, with Dave Crossley, PIBC Executive Director

As a young planner in Alberta starting as a consultant, I had the privilege of working with two very talented and experi-enced planners, Keith Driver and Bob Spencer. There wasn’t a formal mentorship program then; it was more their taking me under their wings—a couple of masters teaching me the craft. They were my role models, leading by example, setting stan-dards of professional excellence and commitment that I knew I would have to work hard to attain. They took time with me and

a better planner than I would have been without their tutelage.

I’ve always been a believer in the concept of karma, which I loosely interpret as ‘you get out what you put in.’ I thought, if I could, I should pay back what I could when I could. Later, I learned that this was a formal obligation of every professional planner. For example, Section 15.3.3 of PIBC’s Code of Profes-sional Conduct says that the professional nature of a planner’s work requires that planners “contribute to the professional edu-cation, mentoring, and development of planning students, mem-bers, and other colleagues.” Mentoring helps us develop the skills to move the profession, and the public’s perception of it, ahead.

Okay, it’s in the Bylaws but, based on my experience as a member of the Professional Practice Review Committee, we’re not likely to censure members for not being good examples to young planners. But, with new national membership standards and CIP bylaws recently adopted with the support of 90% of our members, there will be a huge (and I mean huge!) requirement

-sponsibility to aspiring and young planners, and, sometimes, to seasoned veterans that might just want to talk through an issue.

-guised in the form of Mentor, the son of Alcimus, at Odys-seus’ palace, offering advice to Telemachus, the name Mentor was adopted as an English term meaning someone who imparts wisdom to and shares knowledge with a less experienced col-league—the mentor as a wise, trusted counselor, senior sponsor and supporter. A protégé, based on the French past participle of protéger to protect (from the Latin protegere) means one who is is protected or trained or whose career is furthered by a person

It’s about a nurturing and learning relationship, with an op-

portunity for experienced planners to share their professional expertise, experience and knowledge with those entering the

potential through non-judgmental encouragement and guid-ance. A mentor inspires a protégé to set goals and develop skills that will advance their careers and their ability to contribute to the community. A protégé develops insight and gains both skills and knowledge, through example and support, that helps them navigate their careers.

It’s not about a mentor taking control of a protégé’s career. A mentor’s job is not to create a clone. It’s important to remem-ber that protégés ultimately make their own decisions, taking responsibility for their own actions and development. But, the hope is that they will be inclined to take more informed deci-sions through conversation with their mentors.

Obviously, getting involved in mentoring is a voluntary expres-sion of professionalism. There are a lot of reasons why planners should get involved in a mentoring relationship. First of all, recog-nizing it is a professional responsibility acknowledged in our Code of Conduct, planners will receive Continuing Professional Devel-opment credits for mentoring, just like someone who presents a session at a PIBC conference, for a professional contribution.

put back. At the Nanaimo conference, Gordon Harris FCIP talked about, as an ethical basis, the need for social goodness. This is my argument about karma. There are, of course, other reasons.

As my mother advised me, if you keep connected to young-er people, you’ll keep younger yourself. You just might learn something new. For instance, the typical new planner likely knows a whole lot more about how to use social media than the typical municipal planning director. While they’ve read the

of being exposed to the newest academic ideas, new perspec-tives, that us ‘old boys and girls’ probably might not have seen. Young people bring new ideas and ask new questions; they are worth listening to. Mentoring implies a one way relationship, but the reality is that it is a learning process both ways. You can learn from diversity and different contexts.


It’s a rewarding process. There can be incredible personal satisfac-tion in watching a new planner develop, move ahead—partially just because you were there to ask the right questions, to offer new possibilities, to comment on options about work and career. Sometimes you’re just a sounding board; sometimes you can offer some technical advice. But, I’ve made some good, long standing friends through this process. An intellectual and professional con-versation breeds respect. After an initial coffee get-together ten years ago with one protégé, we’re still in regular contact, learning from each other. In some cases a relationship is developed that might turn into new employment. Each mentor/protégé relation-ship will be different, but they need to focus on learning.

With the recent bylaw amendments and new membership stan-dards that require a more institutionalized and structured men-toring process for all new professional planners, two items are

moving the profession forward by volunteering as mentors. The second is for CIP, and PIBC, to put together advice and resources on how planners can best act as mentors, and help create mecha-nisms—whether they are new online tools or organized social networking events—to help would-be mentors and protégés con-nect with each other. Both steps are critical if we, collectively, are to be successful in developing the next generations of planners.

Where we are now and Where we’re going with MentorshipPlease note that the following are preliminary objectives and actions for the revised Mentorship program being implemented as part of the

The PIBC’s old voluntary ‘match-making’ mentorship program is being ‘wound down.’ As part of the new membership stan-dards and processes, every individual planner who joins the Institute as a Candidate member will be required to undertake

-

Candidate members will be required to undertake networking and outreach on their own initiative to identify and secure their

of mandatory mentoring is to ensure that Candidate members -

ber mentor, and connect with that mentor over time to ensure that the Candidate has exposure to, experiences, or understands several of the key competencies (knowledge, skills, abilities and experience) required under the new standards to become a

The Institute and profession will provide materials and guide-

member mentors in facilitating their relationship. The goal is to ensure that the interactions are focused, and cover the topics and competencies expected of the Candidate members. Some of the resources may include: a mentorship guide or handbook, a self-directed online mini-training module for prospective

documentation of the mentorship process. The idea is that the amount of actual time required by both participants will not be onerous and will normally be limited over a period one year. The mentor is meant to give guidance and assistance occasion-ally over time - not day-to-day training and supervision. The Institute intends to recognize the volunteer contribution made

Professional Development (CPD) credit for the time and effort involved. PIBC will also look at other forms of recognition and

-able time and effort to this important professional role.

Mentorship (cont’d)

by Patrick Coates, Student, Master of Planning Program, Ryerson University, TorontoJoining the PIBC mentoring program as a protégé has provided me with a unique opportunity to gain insight into the planning profession beyond my own educa-tion and experience. After submitting an application I was paired with John Steil FCIP, a senior Professional Planner and CIP Fellow who took the time to share his experiences and act as a sounding board for important academic and career decisions.

For a junior planner having access to a professional mentor like John has meant exposure to a wealth of knowledge and an insider’s perspective on profession-al practice and the institute’s specialized support net-work. John’s guidance has helped develop my profes-sional decision making in a range of areas including enrolment in planning school, pursuing career oppor-tunities to develop new skill sets and working toward full membership with PIBC.

After researching and submitting a copy of the insti-tute’s online application, PIBC took the time to match me with an excellent candidate. I would strongly en-

sign up as a protégé and become involved in the Insti-tute’s mentoring program.

PIBC Council Notesby Ryan Noakes, Administrative & Member Services Coordinator

discussed the possibility of introducing electronic/online voting for members for the next Council election in 2013.

Council also discussed a personnel mat-ter in camera.

Student AffairsUBC: SCARP is preparing to start the hir-

Penny Gurstein MCIP, for when her term as Director of SCARP ends.

UNBC: The Student Planning Associa-tion is determining how to better inform Student members of the available fund-ing opportunities, as there has been little up-take over the last year.

SFU: The REM planning program will host the CAPS Conference in February 2012 at the Harbour Centre campus.

Conferences & Events2higher than anticipated for the Nanaimo conference, with nearly 450 total dele-gates attending. Thanks were expressed to conference volunteers, the organizing team and staff for their efforts.

2012: Work is continuing to determine an initial theme for the Harrison Hot Springs conference, and further meetings will be held to short-list potential key-note speakers and develop sub-themes.

Other New BusinessPolly Ng reported on attending a Statis-tics Canada’s 2011 Census event regarding the changes from the previous long-form census to the national household survey.

New PIBC CouncilOn June 3rd, 2011 the newly elected PIBC

Conference, in Nanaimo. The Council discussed appointments to key Commit-

August 2011On August 12th, 2011 the PIBC Coun-cil met at Bear Mountain Resort, near

Delegation – 2013 ConferenceCouncil heard from Linda Allen FCIP, Co-Chair for the 2013 CIP/PIBC Confer-ence regarding plans for the upcoming

Council provided feedback and ideas for the conference.

CIP ReportLindsay Chase reported on recent activi-ties at CIP, including recent meetings to discuss the impacts of provincial legis-lation and regulations on the Planning For the Future (PFF) Project in Alberta and Ontario.

Education Committee Report

sit on the Education Committee for the current two-year term.

Membership Committee Report

sit on the Membership Committee for the current two-year term.

Council also approved the removal of individuals from the register of mem-bers for non-payment of 2011 fees. It was also agreed that, in the interests of accountability to the membership and public, the names of those Full and Provisional members removed would be published in the next issue of Planning West magazine.

Communications Committee Report

sit on the Communications Committee for the current two-year term.

Other Committees

sit on the Awards Committee for the cur-rent two-year term.

June 2011On June 2nd, 2011 the PIBC Council met

Nanaimo.

Membership Committee ReportCouncil approved a number of new mem-bership applications and membership transfers and changes. Council also dis-cussed an appeal from a member regard-ing the categorization of their academic credentials for the purposes of applying for Membership.

Other CommitteesJoan Chess-Wollacott reported on the conclusion of the work of the Profession-

noting that from all the various discus-sions and engagement with members and analysis of the political and policy envi-ronment, there is no clear, overwhelm-ing direction to pursue legislation imme-diately. Efforts to raise the profession’s

case will need to be addressed in advance

FinancesAndrew Young presented the Institute’s

-

Council also approved a recommendation to the 2011 AGM regarding the appoint-

AdministrationDave Crossley reported on on-going and

-ing: preparing for the AGM and Council elections, processing membership appli-cations and informing interested appli-cants of the new membership standards, conference planning for 2011, 2012, and 2013, and assisting committees with various projects and initiatives. Council


FinancesDavid Crossley presented the Institute’s

-

Institute’s signing authorities stemming from the recent Council elections and changes in various positions.

AdministrationDave Crossley reported on on-going and

-ing: reorganization of Institute archives, enforcing membership standards, PFF meetings will held to hire an association management company to carry-out the

duties of the new national Professional Standards Board, the recently completed CPD needs assessment survey, and 2012 conference planning.

Student AffairsUBC: SCARP will be looking to hire new faculty, as Tony Dorcey FCIP and Bill Rees will be retiring.

UNBC: Planning students are preparing for the start of the new semester next month.

SFU: The REM planning program con-tinues to prepare to host the 2012 CAPS Conference.

Conferences & Events2011: It was noted the Nanaimo confer-ence very successful, and that registration

numbers exceeded targets, while costs

to sit on the Organizing Committee for the 2012 conference in Harrison Hot Springs.

Other New BusinessCouncil approved its meeting schedule for the current two-year term. The pro-posed Bylaw changes to implement the new national membership standards were also discussed. Council also offered its support for the Collaborative for Ad-vanced Landscape Planning project.

Council Notes (cont’d)

PIBC Council Orientation & Strategic Planning

The PIBC Council met over the course of three days (August 11 -

entation meeting, business meeting, and the strategic planning exercise. The orientation portion of the gathering (facilitated by Institute staff) enabled members of the Council to get to know each other, acquaint themselves with the history, operations, policies and practices of the Institute, and their roles as members of the Council. An outside professional facilitator oversaw the visioning and strategic planning elements that followed.

looking at the Institute’s founding documents (i.e. the Constitu-tion), exploring the core purposes of the Institute, discussing the existing strategic plan, as well as team-building, and what the expectations and hopes of the Council members were going into the process.

Secondly, the Council held a discussion and exercise to explore -

nancial resources & budget, personnel, volunteer resources, and other resources. This discussion was intended to help frame the range of options available to, and constraints upon potential goals and tasks.

(spring 2011) PIBC professional development needs assessment survey—with particular emphasis on the various responses to key questions that linked back to certain existing strategic plan items. Certain recurring or dominant themes and priorities were evident from this review.

The Council then engaged in a SPOT analysis (strengths, prob-lems, opportunities, threats) exercise to identify the key issues and elements that impact the Institute and the profession—as they might impact the goals and tasks the Council might seek to set or embark upon.

Following the SPOT analysis, the Council then undertook the development of a revised core strategic plan. Using a struc-tured, focused planning model key result areas were reviewed

and ultimately individual tasks—with attention to resources and timelines. The entire exercise was undertaken with an eye to the existing overarching vision statement.

This resulting 2011 – 2013 Strategic Plan represents the col-lective efforts of the Council, informed by PIBC members, and the Institute’s role, position, and capacity. It sets the key goals and tasks for the Council and the Institute for the coming two years and beyond. The revised 2011 – 2013 Strategic Plan will be available on the PIBC website at: www.pibc.bc.ca

Membership Committee ReportCongratulations and welcome to all the new PIBC Members!

June 2nd, 2011At its meeting of June 2nd, it was recommended and approved that Council admit the following individuals to membership in the Institute in the appropriate categories as noted:

FullRobert BatemanChris BishopLisa Colby (Reinstatement)James DemensRueben KoolePatrick LucasRoxanne LypkaJamie MairJulie McQuireDaniel MilletteMark NeillAndrea NoklebyJoanne Proft (Reinstatement)

Ilene Watson (Reinstatement)

ProvisionalMaira AvilaJustin BarerGraeme BrownStuart Duncan CavensAndrew DevlinJulia DykstraMichael EppMegan FaulknerJeffrey Michael HammShari Holmes-Saltzman (Reinstatement)Mairi LesterStephanie LongAnn MacDonaldMatthew McDonaghHeather MeierNicole Miller

Donald NipTammy PierrotShana RobertsTanya SorokaTyler Thomson

StudentDaniel IwamaAnn ReginerAndrew SherstoneSandra WarrenCarlos Zavarce

AssociateRebecca AugustynNatasha BarrowBill McEwen

It was further recommended and approved that Council approve and or acknowledge the following membership transfers and changes in membership status for the following individuals as noted:

Ian Cooper From OPPI To FullJames Davison From APPI To FullAlana Mullaly-White From OPPI To FullAlanna McDonagh From APPI To ProvisionalKirsten Behler From Inactive/Non-Practicing To FullLeonard Sielecki From Inactive/Non-Practicing To FullSonja Zupanec From Inactive/Non-Practicing To Full

Jamil Rabadi From Full To Inactive/Non-PracticingRebecca Bateman From Provisional To Inactive/Non-PracticingJennifer Casorso From Provisional To Inactive/Non-PracticingJennifer Csikos From Provisional To Inactive/Non-PracticingTatiana Graham From Provisional To Inactive/Non-PracticingKristine Tatebe From Provisional To Inactive/Non-PracticingDaniel Adamson CancelAmica Antonelli CancelStephanie Doerksen CancelCarlos Felip CancelCara Fisher CancelLynda Fyfe CancelKathleen Gilbert CancelDana Hough CancelYu Kuki CancelUgo Lachapelle CancelSimon Lawrence CancelHeather McNell CancelRobin Pallett CancelTiffany Rutherford Cancel (continued next page)

Membership Committee Report (cont’d)

August 12th, 2011

renewed their membership in the Institute for the current year (2011) and in accordance with the Institute’s bylaws were removed from the register of members effective as of August 19th, 2011

FullAkonyu G. AkoloStewart Brady (Non-practicing)Pamela HartlingNeal LaMontagnePatricia LumbTerrence MacdonaldDianne McLauchlan (Non-practicing)Peter S. MurrayJodi-Lyn Newnham (Non-practicing)Wally P. SemenoffArny Wise (Non-practicing)

ProvisionalAdrian BellDesmond BliekH. Scott BoswellGulam FirdosNadele FlynnBronwen GeddesJessica Glor-BellDora GunnMeg HoldenJeremy JonesRose Maghsoudi

Cody MathesonMichael MorellatoRandolph P. MorrisDana ParrAdam PerryAngel RansomNicole TaddunePenny ThompsonShannon WebbAllison Williams

In addition a total of 36 Student members and 14 Associates did not renew their membership in the Institute for the current year (2011) and were also removed from the register of members.

Seeking Submissions for Planning West

Planning West welcomes articles with challenging perspectives, innovative ideas and analytical descriptions of interest to the wide range of practicing planners working in BC and the Yukon.

2011 Winter Issue:

2012 Spring Issue:

Please email for further information.

(formerly PIBC News)

is published by the Planning Institute of

British Columbia (PIBC)

Opinions expressed in this magazine are not necessarily

those of PIBC, its Council, or the Planning West Editorial Team

The primary contact for Planning West is

Please send submissions to [email protected]

Paid subscriptions to Planning West are available for $50.40 (incl. HST). Send a request with a cheque to

, Executive Director Planning Institute

of British Columbia #1750 - 355 Burrard St.

Vancouver, BC V6C 2G8

Tel: 604.696.5031 Fax: 604.696.5032

Email: [email protected]

Find more about the Planning Institute of BC

and Planning West on the internet: www.pibc.bc.ca

This issue was prepared by

[email protected]

Planning West is printed by

Vancouver, BC

Contents Copyright ©2011 Planning Institute of BC

All rights reserved ISSN 1710-4904

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vanhanh
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

Planning West · is our opportunity to give ourselves a collective pat on the back. Here’s to you...

Documents