TOWNSHIP OF ESQUIMALT STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2026 Report No. DEV-26-040
TO: Council
FROM: Bill Brown, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: Options Analysis - Advisory Planning Commission Structure and Establishing Bylaw.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
That Council support the Advisory Planning Commission recommendation that no changes to the Advisory Planning Commission structure or Bylaw be made as outlined in Staff Report No. DEV-26-040.
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Following discussions between Council and members of the Advisory Planning Commission at the February 9, 2026, Special Joint Council meeting, Council passed the following motion:
That staff look at options to change the Advisory Planning Commission structure and Establishing Bylaw to reflect concerns raised by the Advisory Planning Commission and Council and provide recommendations for review by the Advisory Planning Commission, then Council.
This report provides an overview of staffs’ response to these concerns and the discussion staff had with the Advisory Planning Commission at their August 18, 2026, meeting in response to Council’s motion of February 9, 2026.
BACKGROUND:
The Advisory Planning Commission is a statutory body that has been established by Council pursuant to Sec 461 of the Local Government Act to advise Council on all matters respecting land use, community planning, or proposed bylaws and permits under Divisions 4 to 14 of Part 14 that are referred to it by Council. Council relies on the recommendations of the Advisory Planning Commission to help inform their decision making on applications and other matters that have been referred to the Commission. Although Council always appreciates the recommendations of the Advisory Planning Commission, it must be remembered that the Commission is advisory, and Council is not obligated to follow its recommendations.
Recently, the Advisory Planning Commission has raised several concerns related to its role and its relationship with the Design Review Committee and Council. In response to these concerns, Council held a Special Joint Meeting between Council and the Advisory Planning Commission on February 9, 2026. At the joint meeting, Council and the Advisory Planning Commission discussed the following:
- The need for clarity between the Advisory Planning Commission and Design Review Committee,
- Role clarity of the Council Liaison and Staff Liaison,
- Broader scope of work for the Advisory Planning Commission, and
- Better communication and flow of information between Advisory Planning Commission and Council.
Specifically, Commission and Council comments included the following:
1) Members of the Advisory Planning Commission requested more clarity on the distinction between the Advisory Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee, the role of Council and Staff Liaisons, and how the Advisory Planning Commission can provide meaningful recommendations to Council and function effectively;
2) It was suggested that the Establishing Bylaw be reviewed to provide more clarity on the Advisory Planning Commission's mandate and the distinction between the Advisory Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee;
3) Improved communication between the Advisory Planning Commission and Council was requested, specifically in the form of Staff Liaison Updates at Advisory Planning Commission meetings;
4) A broader scope of work is possible under the Establishing Bylaw, but the Advisory Planning Commission is very limited in what it considers and provides recommendations on, and Council was encouraged to refer items broader in scope than land use applications to the Commission
In response to these concerns, Council passed the following motion:
That staff look at options to change the Advisory Planning Commission structure and Establishing Bylaw to reflect concerns raised by the Advisory Planning Commission and Council and provide recommendations for review by the Advisory Planning Commission, then Council.
As per Council’s direction, staff presented a report at the August 18, 2026, Advisory Planning Commission meeting responding to the issues raised at the Special Joint Council meeting held on February 9, 2026. Staff’s responses are noted in the analysis section below.
ANALYSIS:
At the Advisory Planning Commission’s August 18, 2026, meeting, staff presented a report that addressed each of the main concerns raised at the February 9, 2026, joint meeting with Council. The concern along with staffs’ response are outlined below.
1) Advisory Planning Commission Concern - Members of the Advisory Planning Commission requested more clarity on the distinction between the Advisory Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee, the role of Council and Staff Liaisons, and how the Advisory Planning Commission can provide meaningful recommendations to Council and function effectively;
Staff Response - The specific distinctions between the Advisory Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee are found in the Advisory Planning Commission Bylaw 2012, No. 2792 (Appendix “A”). Specifically, Section 23 of the Bylaw states that:
The Advisory Planning Commission shall advise Council on all matters respecting land use, community planning and proposed bylaws and permits under the Local Government Act, other than matters referred to the Design Review Committee under Section 24, which are referred by Council or by Township staff pursuant to the Township’s development application procedures and fees bylaw.
The role of the Design Review Committee is outlined in Section 24 of the bylaw and states that:
The Design Review Committee shall advise Council on matters of urban design arising with respect to:
a. applications for development permits in development permit areas for the establishment of objectives for the form and character of development, other than Development Permit Area No. 3 unless the Council refers the application to the Design Review Committee, and not including applications that are within the jurisdiction of the Director of Development Services unless the Director refers the application to the Design Review Committee; [Amendment No. 3001, 2020]
b. applications for amendments to official community plans or zoning bylaws that establish or amend form and character guidelines, including applications initiated by the Township;
c. applications for zoning bylaw amendments in connection with which the applicant proposes a specific building design, that are referred to the Design Review Committee by Council or by the Director of Development Services; and
d. applications for heritage alteration permits;
e. applications for development permits in development permit areas referred to the Design Review Committee pursuant to Section 24 (a); include review of guidelines in development permit areas 1, 7 and 8 associated with the application. [Amendment No. 3001, 2020]
With regard to the role of Council and staff liaisons, Section 461 (5) of the Local Government Act states:
The following are not eligible to be a member of an Advisory Planning commission, but may attend a meeting of the Commission in a resource capacity:
(a) a council member;
(b) a regional district director;
(c) an employee or officer of the local government;
(d) an approving officer.
Both staff and council liaison may attend an Advisory Planning Commission meeting in a resource capacity. Resource capacity means they should not attempt to influence decisions, assume a leadership role, or do anything beyond acting as a resource.
Finally, regarding providing meaningful recommendations, Council has consistently mentioned how much they value the recommendations of the Advisory Planning Commission. Even if they do not follow the recommendations, they are still highly valued.
2) Advisory Planning Commission Concern - It was suggested that the Establishing Bylaw be reviewed to provide more clarity on the Advisory Planning Commission's mandate and the distinction between the Advisory Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee
Staff Response - As noted above, the current bylaw provides a clear distinction between the role of the Advisory Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee. What is probably needed instead is better training by staff - particularly the staff liaisons - along with on-going reminders of the specific issues the Advisory Planning Commission is addressing with each item referred to it.
3) Advisory Planning Commission Concern - Improved communication between the Advisory Planning Commission and Council was requested, specifically in the form of Staff Liaison Updates at Advisory Planning Commission meetings;
Staff Response - “Staff Liaison Report” has been added to the Advisory Planning Commission agenda as a standing item. Staff liaisons have been directed to provide detailed Council updates at every meeting.
4) Advisory Planning Commission Concern - A broader scope of work is possible under the Establishing Bylaw, but the Advisory Planning Commission is very limited in what it considers and provides recommendations on, and Council was encouraged to refer items broader in scope than land use applications to the Commission
Staff Response - Council has acknowledged the Advisory Planning Commission’s desire to review a broader scope of planning items. There are several upcoming projects that Council will likely refer to the Advisory Planning Commission including but not limited to:
a. Establishment of a DCC and ACC Bylaw;
b. Review of Zoning Bylaw regulations related to Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing;
c. Review of proposed Zoning Bylaw amendments related to Short-Term Rentals;
d. Esquimalt Road Urban Design Guidelines;
e. Major review of the Official Community Plan.
These projects and others represent a significant workload beyond the usual permit reviews that will require numerous referrals from Council along with recommendations to Council to help guide their decision making for these and other upcoming projects.
Advisory Body Recommendations:
At their August 18, 2026, meeting, the Advisory Planning Commission passed the following motion:
That Council directs staff to continue to implement the robust suite of changes presented in Staff Report ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION-26-020 to address concerns raised by the Advisory Planning Commission.
The Advisory Planning Commission appreciated the changes that staff have made and their commitment to continual improvement. Based on these changes they did not feel that it was necessary to amend the bylaw or implement other changes but rather continue on the current path of improvement.
OPTIONS:
• 1) That Council confirm that no changes to the structure and function of the Advisory Planning Commission be made as per the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission at their August 18, 2026 meeting as outlined in Staff Report No. DEV-26-040.
• 2) That Council add this matter to the Council Priorities Plan for the next Council to address.
COUNCIL PRIORITY:
Good Governance & Organizational Excellence
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There are no significant financial impacts associated with the staff recommendation.
COMMUNICATIONS/ENGAGEMENT:
• As per the directive of Council, staff consulted the Advisory Planning Commission prior to reporting back to Council.
TIMELINES & NEXT STEPS:
• If Council adopts the staff recommendation, staff will continue to implement a robust set of changes that respond to the concerns identified by the Advisory Planning Commission including but not limited to:
o Providing the Advisory Planning Commission with an update on issues related to its mandate as a standing item on each agenda for each meeting.
o Providing clear training at the beginning of each year related to the mandate of both the Advisory Planning Commission and the Design Review Committee.
o As appropriate, encourage Council to refer items to the Advisory Planning Commission that fall within its statutory mandate.
REPORT REVIEWED BY:
1. Deb Hopkins, Director of Corporate Services, Reviewed
2. Ian Irvine, Director of Finance, Reviewed
3. Dan Horan, Chief Administrative Officer, Concurrence
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
1. Appendix “A” Advisory Planning Commission Bylaw 2012, No. 2792