[Updated 25-Mar-2011] On March 21, Coquitlam Council unanimously rejected the RGS for serious reasons. The same night, District of North Vancouver has accepted, with some requests. On March 22, Maple Ridge Council voted to accept the RGS. After the dust settles, MetroVanWatch will synthesize an analysis of the situation. Coquitlam’s reasons for rejecting the RGS are broad and will require significant changes to resolve. The RGS cannot proceed further towards adoption until all municipalities have accepted it.
Coquitlam City Council unanimously rejected the RGS. Staff recommended rejection and gave five reasons for doing (see meeting agenda here, download staff report here). Staff recommended the appointment of a facilitator “to address the City’s objections to the proposed RGS.” Watch the meeting on the City’s Archive Player (select Regular Council Meeting, March 21, Agenda item #8).
Article in Tri-City News (22-Mar-2011): Coquitlam rejects growth plan. Excerpt: Coquitlam is headed to dispute resolution after it rejected Metro Vancouver’s plan for how the region should grow over the next 30 years. On Monday, city council unanimously voted against the draft regional growth strategy (RGS), saying it’s too vague, too inconsistent and exerts too much control over municipalities. The refusal by Coquitlam effectively stops the RGS until a settlement is reached. And in the next few weeks, the provincial Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development will decide whether the process will be mediated or arbitrated. Click on link for full article.
After a long discussion District of North Vancouver Council accepted the RGS on March 21, but included this text in the motion: …whereas the current amendment language in section 6.3.4 of the RGS would allow conservation lands to be converted into agricultural land and then industrial lands in two steps by a simple majority of the Metro Board, that the approved RGS be further amended at the first opportunity to require a 2/3 majority for such a conversion….and whereas the proposed RGS does not identify Lower Lynn as a Municipal Town Centre, that the RGS be amended at the first opportunity following its adoption to designate Lower Lynn Municipal Town Centre to Map 2 – regional land uses, Map 4 – Urban Centres, Table 3 – Guideliens for Urban Centres & Frequent Transit Development Areas.