Are Official Community Plans a waste of time?

A hot take for a chilly week.

Welcome to the first official Somewhere North newsletter of 2024.

We’re kicking off the year with a pretty hot take and one that spills out into my general worldview that A) in most logistical outputs, we should value expert opinions over group consensus and B) we spend a lot of time seeking consultation just to make people *feel* consulted rather than to meaningfully direct change.

This is going to be a long one so I’d recommend pouring that second cup of coffee, and leaning back in your chair so your boss thinks you’re REAAAALLY analyzing that Q4 2023 earnings report, not reading some stupid newsletter.

I also want to say - we’re going to be bouncing between the Official Community Plan (OCP) and the Civic Core District Plan (CCDP) just to keep our acronyms straight. Two different things, I know but hopefully you’ll come to understand why I’ve largely become jaded with capital P plans in general.

Okay. Enjoy.

---

What a city wants vs what a city needs

I have a 3 year old niece and she’s the best.

If we ask her what she wants for breakfast, it’s a dice roll - sometimes, it’s crispy grapes and cottage cheese (a big win) but sometimes, it’s cookies. Sometimes, it’s chips.

My point here, put simply, it’s just that we really can’t trust this adorable child to make the best decisions for her health - she doesn’t mean any harm but, at this point in her life, she’s working with pretty limited information on nutrition and largely operating out of instincts (cookie = good, broccoli = bad). This is where the “adults” in the room have to lead.

It’s in this same way that I struggle to really entrust the future of our city to group consensus, especially when that group is the car-centric North American city dwellers of Prince George.

I spent 15 minutes chatting with the (wonderful) City staff at the Farmers Market this summer about the Civic Core District Plan - another big P plan involving months of expensive consultation that seemingly runs in tandem to the Official Community Plan but focuses on downtown (even though the OCP does have a downtown section).

At this table, we drew cute little maps, I learned quite a few of them are Not Just Bikes fans, we talked largely about pedestrianizing and walkability - it was really nice.

But beside us, the whole while, another patient staff member stick-handled 3 back-to-back “consults” of people who just attacked her over the homeless problems, the lack of parking during the day, and how we needed to move downtown to College Heights. I left mostly asking myself how the heck are these poor staff supposed to square all of this into a plan that takes both of us into account?

So then the CCDP is posted and I can’t say I particularly see either myself or the 3 folks I overheard reflected in a meaningful way. Don’t get me wrong - I think the CCDP describes a nice downtown core and it certainly attempts to aggregate some of the feedback, but I also can’t say it’s particularly bold in its plan and feels like we didn’t necessarily need to spend a year consulting the public to determine we want coffee shops, housing, and some things to do downtown.

I guess my point here is are we REALLY supposed to be trusted with steering this ship out of this mess? Heck - we have a University IN THIS CITY that has an entire Environmental/Urban Planning department with some of Canada’s leading experts in this topic. Can we just talk to them?!

Do they even matter?

Okay, so let’s assume for a minute that the residents of Prince George actually do parse through the general misinformation around “good city” building in North America and the OCP comes together with some decent thoughts and feelings about the future of Prince George.

Have you ever looked at ours? Up until last week, I hadn’t. Let’s do a light skim of the 244 pages and see if we can find what our 2012 plan had for policies about downtown.

On one hand, I read this and I’m thinking to myself, YEAH - we should be doing that. On another hand, I’m like - aren’t these just good, common sense principles that we don’t necessarily need to consult citizens for 2 years to determine? And then on a third, more erratic hand, I’m like - did we even do any of this over the last 12 years…?

It feels like you can sort nearly every policy and suggestion in to two buckets - a “humans need to drink water to live” level of helpfulness/specificity OR, for the times a bold, specific suggestion is named, it didn’t happen.

Let’s check in on some of the big challenges in PG today. What does this document say about folks experiencing homelessness?

So, in fairness, it actually looks like there was a survey done in 2021 by PGNAETA regarding the headcount of people experiencing homelessness - which I doesn’t mention if the City *supported* it but I’d say that point is moot - it’s being done so a big green checkmark for that one. As far as what the OCP says we need to do with that data… well, let’s keep reading.

7.5.19 seems to be the most non-specific, non-helpful objective of all time so I’m not sure exactly how to square that one but I’d say that falls under my aforementioned “humans need to drink water” level of specificity.

I guess I look at this and I’m like… *shrug*? Is this even helpful?

I’m not sure where moves like displacing encampments fits in to all of this but glancing back at the city’s communications surrounding those decisions, I don’t believe the OCP was cited once.

“But Darrin - this document is 12 years old. You can certainly forgive it for not being able to handle the challenges of 2023.” Totally - I don’t expect this document to be able to predict the future but I look at a good portion of it and I can’t help but ask - was this ever helpful?!

What do these plans look like in action?

1. History

Looking back at The Citizen is always a treat but finding a 2012 letter-to-the-editor about a proposed drug/alcohol rehab site on Haldi Road, you can see a direct quote on how seriously the OCP was taken in its consideration on a rezoning (literally 2 months after being passed):

Basically - when the OCP was brought up by a resident as a reason to reconsider a rezone, City Council dismissed it in favour of the decision they believed to be correct.

2. Modern

Hanna Peterson wrote a summary here from a December 2023 meeting where public consultation and expert opinion coincide into a beautiful chicken or the egg.

Here, we’re talking about the other P plan, the CCDP but the point largely stands.

This community survey produces feedback on the future of downtown. That data is aggregated and the city hires a consultant to create plans based off feedback. But then - how do we ensure we consult community after the plans are done? And who? Everyone? Stakeholders? Who are they? Who aren’t they?

So what was the point of the initial consult? And at what point do we kind of delegate authority to City Council, who we elected to make these decisions? Or at what point can they delegate authority to expert consultants? Why are the veins in my head bulging right now?

I’m not trying to be the “I’m just asking questions” guy but I guess I am just asking some questions here.

How many capital P plans are there!?!

Possibly the hardest pill to swallow in doing my research for this newsletter is finding links to other massive, multi-year engagements that live rent-free on the City’s website.

You pop a random one open, skim through the 200 page documents and feel completely overwhelmed by the “community consultation” - some of which completely contradict each other, others set out major priorities that have gone completely unattended for the last 10+ years.

The 2007 report on parking downtown specifically names wider downtown sidewalks, and a re-prioritization of pedestrian traffic including narrowing of streets and education sessions on vehicle/pedestrian safety. 2007!!

Wrapping this all up

We could probably go on for another 2000 words here but if I’m starting to feel bored writing this, I can only imagine how you feel reading it.

Are there instances where City Council looked at the OCP or any capital P plan, took it seriously, and followed its recommendations? Probably, from time to time, but in those cases, it also feels like that decision was just the smart decision, not a brave decision rooted in the community plan.

Is it more likely that the OCP is mostly used as a guide when it fits, and then disregarded or ignored when it doesn’t? Yeah, it kind of seems that way.

Does that use-case warrant 2+ years of valuable staff/admin time to create? I know this is a super jaded take but I really don’t think so.

As with anything I write, and especially this one, I’m pretty open to being wrong or having my mind changed here so I do welcome comments/emails/replies that help me understand if I’m way off the beaten path here.

Okay. That’s it for me. Thanks for reading.

---

I’m going to leave you with this great article - 25 New Years Resolutions to improve your city.

ALSO, in summarizing this whole thing last night, I also found that this idea that PG’s OCP might be a waste of time is not a novel one - in fact, Neil Godbout recently wrote a pretty similar op-ed on this issue that gets into a few other specifics we didn’t get into here - specifically how the OCP can be infinitely amended to bend and twist when necessary. Worth a read.

There’s also this Reddit thread that has some commenters who make me feel like I’m not alone in seeing an OCP as an expensive digital paperweight.