In September 2019, Oak Bay council adopted a bylaw accepting all developer conditions claiming they protected the rare heritage house and garden at 2031 Runnymede Ave. This was done after many petitions, letters, public protests and an offer to buy, renovate and protect by covenant the heritage house and property for future generations.
Since then, a second lot at 855 Runnymede Place (not meeting the zoning bylaw requirement for lot width) was listed for $1,750,000 and three structures were built on it, thus creating an undesirable precedent that accelerates the deterioration of the unique properties of Oak Bay. At that time the developers refused to commit themselves to not further dividing the remaining part of the heritage property. Council also allowed the continued use of a secondary suite in the heritage house.
On March 11, 2024, the developers applied for another subdivision of the remaining part of the heritage property. A large development sign was put up on the front fence misleading the neighbourhood by calling it a heritage revitalization project and not indicating the proposed two buildings on the new lot (designated heritage property, included on the heritage register).
According to district planner Kyle McStravick, "As Blair Gowie was fully revitalized under a previous HRA, the revitalization works proposed at present are comparatively minor in nature" ... "as the property was fully revitalized under a previous HRA only within the past few years, little remains to be done in terms of additional revitalization measures."
According to Talmack Urban Forestry Consultants Ltd., a large percentage of the trees could be destroyed due to blasting large areas of rock needed for the construction of the driveway and house. Installation of necessary underground services might also destroy protected trees on two properties across the road.
What is the danger zone for the proposed blasting? It may extend outside the boundary. Our adjacent garden has not been surveyed by the developers and it is potentially in danger as well. Also, we were not offered the required security deposit for significant trees. According to blasting permits in Victoria, the blasting company is required to provide evidence of third-party public liability and property damage insurance in an amount not less than $5 million for any claims which may arise from the proposed blasting.
Is this council prepared to agree to further destruction of a historic heritage property despite being elected to serve the community and preserve the character and beauty of Oak Bay?
Alan Lupin
Oak Bay