A Saanich resident's pleas to appeal a cleanup order were unanimously rejected by council, which granted her 60 days to tidy up her “unsightly property.”
The Burnside Road West residence has been owned by Carols Haines since 2003. Since then, a report from city staff stated that her residence has been the focus of numerous complaints from neighbours and bylaw officers.
Although the municipality conducted a cleanup of Haines’ property in 2020, it has fallen back into disarray since 2022, now littered with “junk” such as appliances, furniture, Styrofoam, tarpaulins, hoses, glass, equipment, signs, vehicle parts, and more.
After several calls for action, the woman’s residence has been found to violate numerous bylaws, namely unsightly premises, garbage, noxious weeds, and unlicensed vehicles.
As a result, Saanich council has issued a second remedial action order in less than five years, giving her a final warning to “remove all the accumulation of filth, discarded materials, and rubbish from the property,” according to the report.
In her plea before council on Monday (Nov. 18), Haines argued that her “limited discretionary income” made it difficult to afford another cleanup by a city-hired contractor. She also claimed the initial 2020 cleanup far exceeded its original scope, resulting in an exorbitant bill.
Haines requested that both the contractor and bylaw officers wear body cameras, should her plea be rejected, to ensure “transparency and accountability,” throughout the process.
“As things stand, I will have neither protection nor accountability once the contractor and the bylaw officer arrive and undertake the remedial action,” she said. “The process is pushing forward rapidly despite my request for a pause, so be it, but at least make it more fair.”
Despite unanimously rejecting Haines’ appeal, council granted her a 60-day grace period to remediate the situation, as initially proposed by Coun. Nathalie Chambers.
“This is a senior and this is only 60 days,” said Chambers.
Coun. Teal Phelps Bondaroff agreed with Chambers’ proposition.
“I think giving them additional time doesn't have any negative impact on our ability to clean up the property, but it does allow them the time to arrange other observers… They need to make sure that the process is one that doesn't cause as much strife as it did previously,” he said.
Coun. Susan Brice, however, was hesitant to give Haines more time.
“I don't know what we've accomplished other than [sending] a signal that we're caring,” she said. “From a practical point of view… I am reluctant to extend the time. On the other hand, extending the time is probably not going to cause any great grief.”
Echoing a similar reluctance, Coun. Karen Harper supported the time extension considering the volume of materials on the property.
“If one is inclined to actually engage in cleanup, which we will find out whether that is the case or not, I think it will take at least 60 days,” she said.
Coun. Judy Brownoff concluded the deliberation by supporting Chambers' motion, all the while highlighting that the council's clemency should not be taken for granted.
“I do agree with my colleagues that the residents should know that council is serious and 60 days is giving you some extra space,” she said. “I think it's a way of saying 'We heard you, we're being more compassionate and we wish you every luck to get the site cleaned up'.”
City staff instructed that they would monitor the property to check for progress and continue to encourage the owner to clean it up independently.
If no actions are taken by Haines, staff will send a letter reminding her to remove and store any items of monetary or sentimental value before the cleanup begins.
Should the owner fail to pay the cleanup invoice by deadline, the outstanding balance will be added to their property taxes.
