Meeting Overview
The Committee of the Whole meeting addressed several key protective services and planning items. The West Shore RCMP reported a significant increase in violent and property crime, prompting discussion on mental health resources and the viability of a community police station. Council directed staff to explore establishing a police station and to report on updated noise mitigation options for the Trans-Canada Highway near Thetis Vale, following a community delegation. In development, the rezoning application for 339, 341, and 345 Island Highway was received for information, but Council expressed serious concerns regarding height, density, and traffic impacts. The Committee also voted to reduce the annual cannabis retail business license fee from $7,500 to $1,500 and narrowly defeated a motion to discontinue membership in the Urban Development Institute.
Key Decisions
- Receive the RCMP update for information.
- Receive the CRD Animal Control update for information.
- Receive the Public Safety report.
- Receive the Building Department report.
- Explore the possibility of establishing a community police station in View Royal.
Transcript
2765 segmentsGood afternoon, View Royal.
I'd like to call the uh committee of the whole meeting to order for Tuesday, September 12th, 2023.
Um, and begin with a territorial acknowledgement that we recognize the Lakongan speaking people known today as the Esquamalt Nation and the Songhees Nation, and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.
This afternoon we'll hear from the public uh during public participation uh portion of the agenda, which is rapidly coming up.
And this evening we'll hear from them uh in the public participation and question period portions of the agenda, um, starting uh that that part of the agenda will start at seven o'clock.
Um for members in the audience, the council is a safe and respectful and inclusive space while balancing um your opinions and the counsel you afford us.
Uh please acknowledge that uh this is the place of respect.
And for those participating by telephone, if you wish to provide comments, call 778-402-9227.
And when prompted, enter conference ID 237-252-60 pound.
At the appropriate time in the agenda, I will then announce the last four digits of your phone number.
Ask you to mute the live webcast to avoid feedback.
Ask you not to use your speaker phone to ensure sound quality, and ask that you unmute yourself by pressing star six.
To begin, please indicate your name and address for the record.
Speakers will have five minutes each to speak during the public participation and two minutes to ask a question or questions during question period, and you will be timed.
This meeting will be recorded by participating in the webcast.
You are consenting to being recorded, and the recording will be available on the town's website for future access.
Just to acknowledge before we begin that uh counselor Brown is currently traveling and he should be joining us around 4 30 our time this evening.
Uh can I uh have a motion to approve the agenda, please.
Moved by counselor uh Rogers, second by counselor uh Lemon.
All in favor.
Any opposed, seeing none opposed.
Motion carries.
Uh, can I get a motion to adopt the minutes to the previous uh meeting?
And that was the 2023 July 11th council meetings.
Move by Councilor Lemon.
So council.
Seconded by Councilor Rogers.
All in favor.
Any opposed?
Seeing no petitions and delegations, we can move directly to public participation.
Is there anybody in the audience who would like to address council?
Seeing nobody here, Carl, have we got everybody on the phone that would like to address council?
Mayor Cabias, we have no callers so far this evening.
Thank you, Carl.
Uh business items.
I'm going to um take over for Counselor Brown, who's not here, and I have uh no chair's report directly, except to say that uh counselor or that Superintendent Preston and I did have a discussion regarding um the levels of uh shoplifting, uh particularly in Langford.
Uh he tells me they're up a hundred percent uh in checking in with managers here at Quality Foods.
Uh and I suspect the same would be going on for thrifties, that they really ceased reporting it because it's so prolific.
Um and that uh it takes, of course, an entire staff out of their day in order to do the report and then to uh subsequent court dates, as well as the potential for altercation uh with with a potential shoplifter.
So I've asked him to go away and and think about potential solutions that we could uh help our businesses out with um because I'm sure that uh such as Langford, ours are having an effect, and even though we have data, some data for Langford, we perhaps don't have any data or as much data as we'd like if people are not reporting it, right?
So it's uh it's um that.
And with that, uh Superintendent Preston, could I invite you to provide an update for us?
Perfect.
Thanks, uh, Mr.
Mayor Council.
Thanks for for having me.
Um, yeah, so I'll go through as usual here.
I'll go through some brief statistics here.
I'll give you an overview of some of the files, and I'll certainly open it up to questions here.
So uh statistics 228 files, uh, which represents a 13% increase uh from January 1st to August 31st last year to this year.
So that's a 13, like I said, 13% increase, 252 extra files that have been reported to us uh year over year, um, with a 10% founded uh file load uh year over year as well.
So uh unfortunately we've had uh 94 founded occurrences uh in reference to violent crime from January 1st uh to August 31st, which is a 22% increase uh year over year.
Um, those violent crimes uh consist of common assault, uttering threats, harassing communications, representing the top three uh violent offenses.
Um and within that it's uh 34 percent, 18, uh 18 percent uh within those.
So you're looking at um uh the property crime like we talked about there, you've got nearly a 20% increase of reported incidents, and we are aware that a lot of uh, especially the grocery stores and some of the other shops there that are just simply not reporting it now.
It seems to be uh almost accepted losses, if you will, and they don't want their employees engaging because of the propensity for violence and uh incidents that are going to result in obviously significantly more event than uh than that of a shoplifting.
Uh so uh yeah, this is becoming a huge issue not I mean it's it's clearly in every community right now and uh when you look at the commerce and just kind of the economy of scale, obviously Lankford with the you know the General's amount of uh commercial space uh commerce that they've got that their ratios are significantly higher.
Um you know to put it in perspective yesterday I was told that we had uh 60 65 files uh yesterday just in the day shift alone which is uh a crazy busy day for us but I know uh the first seven or so files were mental health related all seven of them.
Um so it kind of puts in perspective how policing is transitioning in from you know kind of a law and order uh type of occupation more to uh a lot of social work uh being involved here.
Um, and it's uh there's no end in sight at this point here.
So uh we're obviously gonna have to work collectively with municipal, provincial, and federal governments here to try to try to come up with some solutions here to mitigate some of this because I can tell you right now that the the commerce and speaking with the business owners, um, one in particular I just spoke with yesterday, uh, you know, they're at the wits end and to the point where they're talking about shutting down uh their business just because they can't continue to go down the path of having these types of incidents, and they're worried about their staff and their health and well-being.
They actually do care about their staff and they're worried about that.
So these are things that we need to be cognizant of.
Um, and that, you know, I always encourage you to speak with your provincial counterparts and federal counterparts uh to make sure that they understand on the ground here that this is this is a significant problem in your community right now, in everybody's community.
Um I'll transition over to the Great Casino with the Great Canadian uh Casino.
So we've had uh we've been there 68 times this year, um, eight percent increase year over year, and within that, uh causing a disturbance, impaired operation of a motor vehicle, suspicious occurrences, public intoxications uh represent the highest incidence uh of those.
Uh hospital, uh we've been there 153 times since the beginning of uh the year, uh, which is pretty much uh on par with last year.
It's only a one percent increase.
So we're pretty much status quo from last year.
Um, the amount of times we've been up at the hospital, and obviously, mental health cause disturbance and check well-being calls are are the the main ones that we're getting up there.
Uh files of the mental health component um we've had 151 um mental health uh calls for in in view royal here um which is actually an eight percent decrease from uh from last year um and again i don't know you know there's some of that and i think you know no different than the shoplifting i think a lot of times the tolerance levels people are kind of seeing this is commonplace now where they're seeing people that are um having significant mental health issues and they're not reporting it uh because it seems to be more common where it wasn't as common before, and then now it's they're becoming used to it or are numb to the fact that uh you know we've got people that um we we you know I think I talked to you last time about the decriminalization of drugs and the uh the open use.
And so that's uh that's something that not everybody's still used to.
Um but in this province here it is legal to you know inject uh hard illicit drugs um on the streets, uh on on the sidewalks, in a bus depot, um, and all these different places.
Uh so you know I know there is a movement at foot here working with the British Columbia Association of Chiefs of Police with the province trying to and the Health Canada to try to uh make some amendments to the uh the act there because we recognize that there's significant concerns, the public.
You know, I've heard loud and clear from many mayor and counselors that that uh that's causing a lot of concern for their constituents.
So I think you'll see some movement uh there, but I would continue to request that you advocate on behalf of whatever you're hearing on the ground, because uh you have a very strong voice.
And we uh in terms of the mental health there, um, you know, we've got a lot of calls there for suicidal individuals, and we spent uh 127 hours uh on those types of calls just dealing with uh some suicidal individuals here from the last quarter or so.
Um I wouldn't mind just reading through some of the calls for service here.
So um this is from the middle to end uh sorry, from July and uh and August here.
So we had a report of a male sleeping uh in a vehicle on uh Glenary uh drive.
It determined to be stolen out of Duncan.
The male was arrested for possession of property.
Um sorry, um possession of drugs and was searched with a large quantity of uh drugs, meth, cocaine, crack, fentanyl are all located at individuals take into cells.
We had the casino where a male gained entry to an unlocked employee's car, was rummaging through it, small amount of change was taken, no uh no identity uh made.
We had a stabbing at a bus stop near Helmoken, suspect was arrested, held in custody, and the victim sustained stab wounds, but was expected to recover.
Uh the victim and suspect uh are unknown to each other, and uh motivation is being uh determined potentially a mental health component to this.
Uh we had a female uh who was previously banned from a store, re-entered this and stole the candy, was confronted by a clerk, brandished a baseball bat, and asked the clerk if he wanted to fight.
The uh subject then was gone on arrival and we're waiting um CC TV uh camera footage.
So, again, exactly to our point where we just uh you mentioned Mr.
Mayor there right at the beginning.
Um, these are the types of files that are coming in on a daily basis right now.
Uh, we had a mischief at quality foods where a male threw a glass uh bottle of milk at the till, smashing it everywhere, and the male was escorted out of the uh the store.
Uh Admirals Road in Allen Highway, the citizen walking the dog was accosted by an unknown homeless female who swung a bat uh or sorry swung a bag at a citizen and started chasing her down the street.
Patrols were conducted on uh unknown subject of complaint.
At the four mile liquor store, the front door was smashed.
A large truck tried to break in, considerable damage to the door, and it was a stolen truck used in the crime.
And that one's still under investigation.
We had uh several callers report a uh female climbing over the rail at the Helmican Overpass.
Members and a passerby were able to convince this young lady to uh to come over back off the railing.
Our members attended and blocked the highway.
We had an impaired driver uh near the intersection of Six Mile Road and Island High was pulled over and then attempted to drive away while the officer was reading the breath demand.
Uh they were arrested.
Uh then the drunk passenger tried to drive away with the car.
They were also arrested for obstruction, and a 90-day IRP was issued.
We had a bacon enter to a business near the 1600 block of Violet Highway.
Uh the small front door was smashed, and uh that is still under investigation.
We had a report of youth who stated uh he was bear sprayed while attending a party under the bridge at six mile, on cooperative witnesses and victim, no lasting injuries, and the parents were involved and notified.
We had a group of youth at the top of Shoreline Middle School, uh, on the top of Shoreline's uh middle school.
The officers found uh the youth who claimed to be making TikTok videos.
All were warned about mischief and agreed to leave the property.
We had a trader fire uh on the 1500 block of Middle Road, uh, suspected to be a cigarette uh not completely put out, but perhaps the chief here will elaborate more on that.
Uh we had a male and female refusing to leave a parking lot uh holiday inn, Whale Road were found to be high on drugs, but unable uh unable to uh or sorry, able to care for themselves, and they were moved along.
We had a domestic uh on the beach area of uh Durk Hill.
A couple arguing turned violent, and one party tried to hang themselves.
Officers attended to arrested the violent party who was taken to the hospital for mental health concerns.
Um stop there.
That's just a sampling of the files here in the last uh since the last council meeting there.
So I'll open it up for questions, sir.
Thank you very much.
Uh Superintendent Preston uh we'll go with counselor Mattson first.
Thank you.
Uh couple of questions.
Um on page two of the uh View Royal statistical report, um about 75% of the 1445 codes are uh RCMP statistical codes.
So could you tell me what's included in that?
Uh sorry, can you go again with that, sir?
So on page two of your report, I I don't have the report in front of you.
This is it's got a long the West Shore detachment lists the types of crimes and crimes of persons, offices or offenses against property, and then it goes down and it also includes RCMP statistical codes.
And that includes about 75% of the total.
And I'm just wondering what's included within those codes.
You know what?
I'll have to get back to you on that one, counselor.
Yeah.
All right.
Um this is almost a rhetorical question, but uh is the catch and release policy of the courts responsible for all the shoplifting that, etc.
that's going on.
Um, you know, no, I I I I I would say that a lack of um complex care, uh wraparound care.
Um we have individuals there that clearly are struggling to take care of themselves, uh, that are danger to themselves, that have no means to support themselves, that are in the public, and I think we're seeing a lot of that.
I mean, I think there's a culmination.
You got one, you've got the mental health component, uh, metadictions, which is clear, and then you've got you know, an economy here that's hurting in one of the most expensive places in in Canada to live.
So you got a lot of desperation.
You get we're we're we are seeing desperate people out there.
There's uh there is you know families that are struggling to feed themselves, and we're seeing some of that as well.
Um, but I would suggest to you that you know the other portion of it is clearly we have some individuals that are unhoused mental health and addicted, and collectively we haven't found a solution to these individuals.
Okay, thanks.
Uh I noticed that you're having uh putting together a mental health team, and you said you're still waiting for social workers from Island Health, I guess, to join your team and sort of what's happening there.
Yeah, so we're meeting uh I think Inspector Rose uh probably updated you last time he was here.
So we do have uh three individuals selected.
They have uh they will be starting here soon.
We have one member that's already started to get the uh the unit up and running.
Um hopefully we'll be joined soon.
I know that Inspector Rose, I believe it's this week, actually has a meeting with uh Island Health to see what the timelines are for the the nurses to join our team.
But uh by all accounts, we're essentially ready to ready to proceed.
Just a couple more quick ones.
Basically it sounded like alcohol abuse at the casino.
Now is this something that we could deal with I mean would reducing their casino license have any are you on the liquor license would that have an impact or you know is there anything else we can do contact the casino to yeah I mean you can you can get a hold of uh the gaming branch I think would probably be the you know if you if you feel that uh you're having significant concerns and um you know it's an eight percent increase over last year uh you know the gaming branch uh would certainly can go in there and and look uh for over service um in terms of intoxicated individuals that's their mandate um so I'd suggest that that might be uh a route that you may want to look into.
I I guess just in relation to that is this something the casino could actually uh address in terms of is it a matter of cleaning up their act or is it just people coming there who are already drunk and I yeah I'd be difficult for me to comment on that other than to say that I you know I'm I presume they all have the servite right program uh over there but it is difficult when people show up uh jump onto a onto a machine or at a table, and it's pretty tough sometimes to determine the level of intoxication, to be fair to them.
Um you know I think that again, that's why I leave it to our friends at uh the gaming branch there, that they probably have a little more knowledge and expertise on exactly um yeah, just kind of give them perhaps some proper guidance to the casino to make sure that we're not gonna see a steady increase year over year of uh incidents that are chewing up valuable police time there to deal with intoxicated individuals, which is normally like you say it's it's nuisance cards, yelling, screaming, it's it is the impaired driving as well, people leaving the casino impaired.
But I think a lot of the times it's inside intoxicated uh individuals that um are in the case found in the casino that we end up having to deal with.
Okay.
And if you had uh one thing you'd ask a bus as a a council to do in in terms of you know whether it be lobby the provincial and federal governments or or or anything else that would have be of assistance to you in terms of reducing the incidences, what would that be?
Yeah, and I think I uh you know I'll just reiterate what I said earlier.
It's I mean policing has changed exponentially over the last uh decade or so, and it's all transitioning into individuals that are suffering from addictions and mental health.
And I I just can't emphasize enough.
I I've offered it up before, come on a ride along, come on another ride along, come on as many ride alongs as you want.
If you need to get uh the perception to to get a a solid grasp of what uh policing has become and and what we're dealing with on a day-to-day basis, um I think most people would be shocked to see how much mental health uh and addictions we deal with on a day-to-day basis.
So to answer your question I would suggest that yeah we're you know advocacy and in terms of finding facilities that can properly treat these individuals.
Okay thank you very much.
Thank you.
Uh counselor Rogers are you up next or we go to Counselor Lemon.
Counselor Lemon please.
Thanks Todd it's it sounds like absolute mayhem.
And and um I'm sorry for your you know the day-to-day challenges you and your colleagues are putting up with.
And it also explains why there's a full-time security guard at Thrifty Foods.
Yeah.
Um just a question about um recruitment.
Is given given the the state of the world and the state of you know of of work, uh it are you hard pressed to attract and you know fill the um the number of police officers.
Sure, it's a it it's actually a good question.
And um, you know, I'm actually happy to to report that uh we've seen an uptick in the number of applications or interests, certainly at the detachment level here.
Um I think a number of years ago when there was a movement for defunding the police, and uh, you know, I think law enforcement was cast in a in a pretty dark shadow.
And um I think we're actually seeing the pendulum swinging here, and it's actually great to see.
And uh it it makes me uh proud and happy to see that um, you know, it's becoming, I think again, people are starting to see it as a very respectable occupation, and perhaps um they're having a better understanding now that they're seeing, I think it's becoming a little more public as to some of the growing concerns when we talk about mental health addictions.
It's not just a police uh and I think the separation between us and other countries.
I think people are are recognizing that law enforcement in Canada is distinctly different than other countries, including our counterparts to the south, there.
So um, you know, we're seeing a lot of uh experienced police officers in terms of the RCMP.
We're we're really fortunate right now.
We're seeing a lot of uh experienced police officers coming over.
Um that probably helped because our pay scale jumped back up, and we're very competitive with every other police force now, and we're able to offer a lot of opportunities.
So we're very fortunate in the sense that we have a federal side of policing that we can uh offer, you know, national security jobs, uh drug enforcement, some some different uh jobs that perhaps some of our uh counterparts um don't have the same opportunity.
So we're in we're very fortunate in that regard, and so we are seeing an uptick in that as well.
But I am being told that we are our numbers are definitely increasing.
Um saying that, we're we are short at the detachment now.
We've got uh close to 20 people that are off.
We have 110 people on compliment, we've got 20 off.
We have they've allowed me to bring in an extra 10.
So we're short 10 essentially right now.
Um but of course in the new year we'll have some new positions uh uh coming in as well.
And I think you know, when we talk about the burnout, the mental health, 65 calls for service with uh I think there's seven or eight members yesterday working.
Um yeah, you can see how this is kind of a snowball effect.
And uh when you have uh the more people that go off, the more work that's left for the people that are still working, and it just becomes uh the cycle of uh stress.
So, you know, trying to keep us properly staffed is certainly my priority.
I owe it to the the men and women on the ground there to try to make sure that they're not leaving, um having a helmet fire every night when they're going home.
So um, anyways, long-winded uh answer to to say that yeah, it is you know it is getting better for us okay good i you know just one more one more quick one later on the agenda um and he's not here to speak for himself so um you know i'm and he hasn't asked me to speak for him but there's an item from counselor brown um asking us to consider working with you uh to explore the idea of a community policing space yeah um uh with the work to work with the song keys and the squamalt nations um is that something that you would be seeking or required, or is Cole, is it all working well for coal in his car?
Well, Cole, Cole works exceptionally well um providing service.
So he's um his sole responsibility as a bridge builder between the First Nations and the RCMP.
And you know, frankly speaking, I and words from the chief, he's beloved down on uh on the reserves there.
He's uh well thought of, compassionate, empathetic, builds great, great rapport, great bridges for us.
Um, you know, we can uh we can do anything.
I mean, you're you're essentially our police board.
So if you, you know, if you were asking me to open a police station uh a community police station, but that does come with you know a cause and effect in terms of financial.
Um, you know, and we have 12 or thirteen percent increase in calls for service in view royal alone, and we're up significantly, you know, I'm gonna be coming to you asking you for a body.
I think it was in the in the plan for this year, uh sorry, next year, like in 2024, I'd rather have a body that's on the ground that can respond to these calls than a community police station, if I'm being frank with you.
Um to have them both would be great, but I obviously have to be realistic and uh and again I think I mentioned before that uh I think the community police stations are better served in in denser areas where there's much uh you know, there's obviously a lot more foot traffic, or you're dealing with um marginalized groups that uh you know perhaps don't trust the police and you're really trying to build that bridge.
But again, it's typically you see it in the big cities uh where it's more of a dense area.
Um we have uh coal on the reserve and he has office space in the Songhis uh building their their uh wellness building.
Um if you know we have our vehicles, and I think I've I've preached this before.
Like our our members are out on the road, and you see them out here, and they've been told uh to park their cars strategically to write files up to have high visibility so people can you know if they want to, they can walk up and have a chat with about the car, but they're also there at admiral, so that people aren't you know as uh keen to to shoplift.
So we uh you know we try to be strategic, or you know, if we have a speed issue, we we strategically park them uh near Sanit Road or or what have you.
So that I'd rather have that than have a member sitting in a community police station waiting for people to come to us.
I'd rather be out in the public.
So good.
Thanks.
Councilor Rogers, please.
Yeah, uh, thanks.
And uh, you know, the the report was very useful.
Um I'll jimp all over the place.
One um you know lovely to hear uh how well the um um the officer assigned to First Nations and and the public relations and the trust that they uh that he's established unfortunately the um the school district 61's decision uh to pull uh policing from the school programs and and we have certainly expressed our concerns um but it's uh it's telling to see uh the impact that it's having on on this constable's delivery of service.
Particularly uh uh I gather a canoe trip or canoe programs had been canceled because of the uh school board's uh decision and unfortunately 62 is is much wiser and and uh allowing this to continue and they've got the benefits and hopefully um 61 will come around we'll see what happens we I guess we've got to continue the lobby on on that regard.
Yeah I hope so but I appreciate the uh the the real perspective uh in the report on that um um I want to shift to um uh traffic and and speeding and the the comment uh that uh because ICBC has stopped the vow license renewal um program where it's obvious, it seems to be a a significant impr increase of workload to the officers.
Can you uh expound on that?
I think uh and I don't want to misquote it because I but I do think we've had a dramatic increase in uh driving without insurance.
Um I don't have it in front of me here, but we have the automatic license plate readers.
So I mean the risk you have is that you got you know good members of the public that you know forgot about their uh their renewal, and typically they're reminded when they're putting their groceries in the back of the uh the car and they see their tag.
And we have seen that a fair bit where people have just simply forgot, you know, they misplaced, they put this, uh they put the piece of paper in, and that was the reminder.
So um, but yeah, I I think, I mean, obviously it is more work in the sense that we have to sit.
If we don't have an automatic license reader uh reader, which I think we have three or four in the detachment, uh the traffic services members, so they're equipped in their vehicles, but our general duty members, you know, they'd be at a traffic light and they're always scanning or trained to scan vehicles, scan plates to see um, you know, unlicensed uh vehicles.
And so now you have to simply you have to run every plate unless you have one of these automatic license plates readers which is on top of the light bar, which scans 360 around your vehicle, it hits and uh and provides uh instant data back to the computer.
So until we have these uh these in every vehicle, it certainly does cause more manual labor um in terms of trying to run and see who's who's registered insured and who's not.
Saying that, like I said, we have installed a number of uh these license plates readers, and those have provided significant dividends in terms of finding those individuals.
I guess the thing is that you know, while uh the reliance is on on uh the police department to um had these this automated methodology to catch these.
And yet it's ICBC that has the ultimate responsibility and and has the um disowned that responsibility.
Um maybe because they think it's cheap in in some senses, but on the other hand, if you have people driving around uninsured, that could be pretty costly to ICBC unless the cost they're just gonna leave it to the individuals to sort it out in civil court.
Yeah, and and the uh yeah, there's there's some validity to your your comments there, counselor.
And yeah, um those uh license plate readers cost about $25,000 a piece to put on.
I know ICBC did provide a one or two I believe at the the onset and we've just been slowly building uh the the assets up.
Mm-hmm.
So maybe that that's some correspondence that we should be sending or thinking of sending to ICBC and and um with the expectation that they they should be providing every officer or every car with with that capability of catching what they they are willingly ignoring.
Yeah and I yeah I would I would strongly encourage you um when you go to your annual meeting um with the the province and ICBC that yeah, I mean detachments should be equipped with uh the technology.
If you've taken away the you know, the obvious technology, uh the you know, the visual that we should be provided with the other one because it is quite a bit of time.
Plus um, you know, it's also a lot of you know, I consider safety things when you have members that are having their head down typing on a computer, I'd rather their head be up facing the roadway.
So um it's difficult, you know, to to see a plate.
Um and then, you know, you'd have to pull over to run that plate, and by the time you've done that, it's it's gone by you, right?
Right.
Yeah.
So you then you gotta catch the guy.
Correct.
Yeah.
Um moving along to um Council Masson mentioned the uh mental health unit, but I noticed in the report there's some issue um you don't have space to house them in in the uh the current building.
Yeah, I you know what I I can't emphasize enough how how critical.
Like we've we've now officially run out of space.
Um, you know, it's been five years ago we were gonna run out of space, you know, with the formal council we we talked to and um you know, mayors and CAOs, we are definitely gonna run out of space.
We need space by um essentially now.
And you know, we're we're a long ways from having the the building structured and and uh and erected and run out of space.
So we are looking at um options right now, potentially there's uh space at City Hall in Langford down the street to to move some units.
But we really it's gonna really start affecting operations when you can't start up units or you can't effectively run units um because of simple asset management.
Yeah.
And so I really hope that you know I know Mr.
Mayor is on the committee.
I really strongly hope that uh we see a strong push here now that summer's over to get things rolling because uh it is gonna affect operations here.
Thank you.
Uh Council Lemon mentioned uh equipment, so let me shift the uh a little bit on that.
Uh body cameras.
Um, how and where are we on in terms of the federal funding and deployment of that equipment?
Yeah, in terms of the federal funding, I I can't comment on where the federal funding portion is.
I do know that body cameras are coming.
Uh unequivocally, they are they are coming.
They're just uh they're slow.
They had to go through the procurement process.
I think they've uh selected a um a couple test sites.
They're they're and then they're gonna be unrolling them out.
They in fact I think they're starting to uh uh on unroll them out or uh roll them out right now uh in certain detachments.
Uh I know there's certain detachments that have been uh designated as priorities uh right off the bat, just because I think there's been some critical incidents that have occurred there that have perhaps fractured some relationships that we're trying to to continue to build.
So but uh yeah, I have every confidence in the next you know 12 to eighteen months you'll we'll start to see them here.
Thank you for your time.
Yeah, thank you.
Seeing no other questions, uh thank you, Superintendent.
Um next on the agenda is CRD animal control.
Uh for the uh August two thousand three summary good afternoon my name is Mark Grew um afternoon your worship members of council I'm the uh Chief Bile Officer for the uh bylaw on animal care services for the capital regional district so I hope that you will have in front of you the stat sheet that we submitted, I believe a few days ago.
That uh just basically outlines uh some of the things we've been involved with in uh animal care services enforcing your animal control bylaw.
Um not a lot to talk about.
Uh what I normally usually bring to your attention is the highlights.
Um, and of course, I'll definitely uh field questions if you have some when I'm done.
Uh, are the the attacks uh we and we did make some modifications to this uh stat sheet as a result of feedback from uh the members of council.
So I do appreciate that.
It's certainly gonna help me.
Um yeah, the uh dog attacks, uh both domestic and human.
I believe we had in July, we had two in July, and if I'm reading this correctly, two and sorry, I'm gonna go down one.
One, yeah, basically one and one, and uh uh one uh uh animal on animal in July.
Now, I mean they were minor.
I mean, none of them resulted in a dangerous dog declaration.
And like if it's worth anything, of all the uh municipalities that we're working with, um, this is like the lowest.
So that's a good sign.
Um why that's the case, I don't know, but um you I rest assured I'm kind of following it because I I have a bigger picture for myself and for my my unit uh going forward with this whole process.
The danger Dog Declaration is is pretty much unchartered territory in the province, although it's in the charter and it's prescribed.
Uh everybody sort of administers it a different way.
So I I've put some measures in place that I hope are having an effect.
So I don't know, maybe this might be uh a symptom of it.
We'll see.
Um but that's also a sign that I think the people in View Royal are pretty good for the most part.
I mean, with when we do our patrols, uh we're not having the issues which ironically enough um corroborate um the superintendent's uh uh uh um narrative on some of the some of the issues that they deal with, i.e.
vis-a-vis the mental health and addictions, because we deal with it as well, believe it or not.
Animal control and we deal with it.
And more often than not, we have to call upon our learned friends across the street from us in Langford, and they're they're wonderful.
They we work well with them.
But these are some of the things we have to deal with.
That's more often than not when you look at some of the total hours uh at the bottom of each of those uh months, you'll you'll see, you know, the 52 hours.
A lot of that can be attributable to the amount of time it takes to deal, and and I know it's gonna sound a bit ridiculous, but a barking complaint.
You would be amazed at how long it takes to manage that.
And you know, when you're dealing with reasonable people, it can be very quick and short and sweet, and and uh ironically enough, your bylaw uh is probably one of the best when it comes to barking, the the metrics that are in that bylaw, and we often refer to it with our other partners because it works seems to work well, and it's it's it's easier for us to manage.
Um you're dealing with uh the mental health issues and stuff, it it can be very problematic.
But for the most part, um uh you'll see there we have a new uh category which I don't think was there before.
I certainly I wasn't here the last time I I was here in May.
Uh the the vehicle, uh dogs, dogs in hot vehicles.
So during the summer, we get a lot of those.
And uh we now actually have a pretty fulsome process for that, which is nice uh because uh prior to my arrival to that position, we there was there was um a misconception by the public that we would break into vehicles, like literally break windows to get a dog out there, and now we have a more non-intrusive method and protocol that we follow.
The breaking will come from either uh by the police or at the direction of police.
It's just something just nice food for your, you know, food for thought kind of thing.
Um what else we got here?
We can talk about um really nothing else with with respect to the stats.
They're kind of sort of on par.
Uh, unfortunately, I've uh I I noticed the August stats.
I was away in June for a period of time.
I noticed the August stats uh were somewhat um dismal in our patrols of your major parks, but um I can rest assured that's not normally the case.
Um I'm I mean without making excuses, just more for awareness.
Uh we we did we are currently down two officers, full time officers, as a result of uh medical issues.
So that can be taxing on the bylaw department.
Uh we often rely on um auxiliaries, which means we might get an auxiliary who's been probably newly hired in May and has only been out on the road four or five times through a partnering program we have to train them up.
So they they they they would have missed this, they wouldn't even have thought to do this, they would have been focused on file management and dealing with high priority calls.
But going forward, that should change.
Um with that, uh you'll notice.
I thought I might as well mention because I don't know if anybody's mentioned it uh prior to my arrival.
Uh in the last uh six months, you'll uh we are a different face for you.
We have new vehicles, we are no longer white, we have gray vehicles.
They're all decaled out with the CRD logo, and our officers now are all equipped with a stab vest, much uh like uh the superintendent's vest, except not the same uh ballistic capability.
But the reason why I bring this up, A, for your awareness, so that if you see them parked around, you'll thinking it's a different agency, it's us.
You'll still see some of our older white ones, but we're slowly phasing them out.
Uh but the the vest was uh came as a result of an occupational health and safety uh review at our department as a result of an incident back in April where one of our officers was uh injured.
So this gives you a kind of an idea, and it also supports what the superintendent uh brought to your attention earlier about the things we're dealing with.
Uh, bylaw officers have expectations now uh by the general public that are on can be on par with what police do.
So but we um we tried to uh purchase one that was not as um intimidating, and we did a lot of consultation, and of course the officers are they're all wearing it.
I probably should be, but because I'm indoors, it's too hot to wear.
But uh that's that accounts for sort of the changes that uh we've undergone here in the last few months.
So I'll open up to questions.
Thank you very much for uh your report.
Uh questions from counselors.
Counselor Rogers.
Yes, sir.
Thanks for the report.
Um the parks that you've listed, um uh Thetis Lake, which is a CRD park, um, you're you um you're responsible for Thetis Lake?
We do bylaw enforcement during the summer months.
Right.
Only.
Okay, interesting.
That's specifically tied to the beach area.
Right.
Beach areas.
I believe there's two there.
Okay.
So they they actually uh contract us uh our parks, CRD parks, to perform that.
And that's a that's above and beyond what the rangers do, the park rangers.
Okay, and and those those of course would be you know individuals, residents from the whole the whole region.
So with respect to the um um cars and dog or yeah, heart cars and uh dogs and hot cars, um, you know, that was a 50% increase over last year, um, which was pretty significant and are these in just in view oils would it be in the sake would it be at the shopping centers um where would uh those locations be good question and i actually have the answer for you eagle creek and uh the hospital oh is that right well and you think about the uh the the the totality of the situation in the hospital often people might rush to the hospital right uh because they're on the road they have their animal in there and of course you have uh so many people going coming and going to that place they automatically see an animal in a car and it's you know a million degrees out, but they don't often when we get there, I would say probably 80% of the time, maybe even higher than that, when we get there investigate, we find out they've only been there for a few minutes.
We have a whole process where we measure the heat, but with a heat sensor, the heat inside the vehicle.
Uh it's just it's probably the uh the vigilance of the general public, and that's why you see this blip on a radar.
That was just for View Royal.
You should see what we have from Costco in Langford, like it's just um again, marked increase.
And and and a lot of times we get there, by the time we get to the to the place, um, they're gone.
Uh the people in and out to the store.
Thank you.
Another question with respect to the complaints, um, is there do you get any complaints about feeding wildlife?
Uh uh in View Royal, I don't recall any, but in other municipalities, yes.
Okay.
So if there were an instance um where that there was a complaint that you received about that in View Royal, you'd be adding that to this column or to this report.
We would, it just would I think it depends on the circumstances.
Quite quite often it might be referred to uh BC conservation.
It just depends.
I I can't remember what your bylaw speaks to specifically.
There may be a provision within your bylaw speaks to it.
I don't remember.
Okay.
Maybe you could sort that out.
Okay, thanks very much for your time.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilor Matson.
Yeah, just a quick question.
You mentioned most of the dog attacks were minor.
I'm just can you sort of describe what I'm what minor means?
Absolutely.
We actually are using a new uh new system it's referred to as the Dunbar scale.
It's an actual uh documented scientifically uh tested out of the US because when I first came into the job two years ago there was nothing it was it was purely a subjective decision uh starting with the officer uh up to myself who makes the ultimate decision so we put this into play uh I researched it put it into play so minor is anything that's under a level there's there's five scales so there's one to five sorry six uh and I think there may be one seven but that's deaf so anything between one and five is where we commonly work with uh uh minor is under three.
So it could be that you're walking down a pathway and somebody's dog jumps up at you, and of course, because of the dog nails, scratches you.
You get a scratch.
That's minor.
You can even have a dog potentially bite you, but we often refer to that as a nip.
And that could be a playful puppy.
It nips you.
But if you're not familiar with that dog and it happens to you in a public park, whatever, it gets reported to us.
So we still have a process to address it, and we use that scale, which we have it's it's it's a year in the running now, and we haven't had anybody challenge it because it it's scientifically based, so it's it's it's better than what we had.
Uh so once they get to about a level three, then we look at the totality of the circumstances.
So if it's a repeat offender, is it a bite, uh uh is it a dog attack on a dog, or is it a dog attack on a person, or is it both?
So these are the factors that that come into play when because to to issue or impose a dangerous dog declaration, that's like that's like putting somebody on probation in the uh in the general public.
So it's pretty it can be pretty onerous, and each municipality has uh stipulations once it's declared dangerous, what you have to do, i.e.
muzzling, maybe maybe it has to be kept in a in a um contained area in your yard.
Uh each one has their own little nuance, each uh municipality, and of course the dangerous dog sign posted at the end of the clear view to the general public approaching your property has to be posted and there are repercussions if you fail to do any one or more of those things monetary penalties so the minor ones are all scratches and nips and more often than not we even ask people we'll say to them you know what do you think about this and it's like oh that's a one-off obviously that's that I could tell that was the new uh a new puppy it looks like it's about eight months old and so we go okay so we're prepared to either issue the we can issue sometimes if the dogs more often not it's off leash so uh at large and or a dangerous dog caution so that starts that process now puts those people on notice your dog is is in the doghouse so to speak so he cannot he or she cannot do that again like can't can't repeatedly do that because eventually it will it may end up as a dangerous dog declaration those are the ones you'll see sometimes in the parks well they're not allowed in the park in the CRD parks but uh they have muzzles on them so hopefully that answers your question yeah thank you very thorough council McKenzie, please.
Yes, thank you uh a quick question.
At the bottom of the table, the summary table, it refers to shelter revenue received.
I'm just wondering um who, yeah, which direction is that money is that coming into us or is that money that's um going out to other institutions?
I believe I can't remember if the shelter revenue comes back to View Royal or not.
I I can't remember.
I don't have I just don't it doesn't.
So then yeah, so then we do keep that revenue then.
Yes, it's not part of the contract, so we we therefore we keep it.
And what is that revenue for exactly?
Well, that's the impounds and qu to maintain the animals at our shelter.
Okay, so it would be the owner paying that to the remote.
Yes, oh yeah.
When we get when we pick up a dog and we take it out to the shelter, and if it's unlicensed, then we to get the dog back, they've gotta pay the license fee and the um shelter, there's a standard fee for uh for us picking up the dog.
Hence the reason why we tell people if they get we encourage people to get their license because more often than not they have a licensed dog, then we ch we can check.
I could check in the back of the building here, the license, and go, Oh, um that's the the the mayor's dog and get call the office, call you and say, I got your dog back behind the the office here.
Where are you?
Oh, sugar aisle, I'll you know, can you drop it off at my house?
And we'll do that.
That's the advantage of having that's what encourages people to get a license.
Save them the trip out to Santax to go and to go and bail it out of doggy jail.
I don't think I have any more questions.
Great, thank you.
Yeah.
Thanks for your report and and your your answering all of our questions.
And uh bid you a good afternoon.
Thank you very much.
Thank you for your time, everyone.
I think now we uh turn to our fire chief for the public safety report for July and for August.
Chief first, please.
Good afternoon, Mayor, Mayors of council.
Uh monthly report for July and August of 2023.
Um just a couple of notes.
Obviously, the report is what it is, and I'll I'm happy to answer any questions that you have on the report.
I'm just gonna touch on a couple things.
Um just to echo the uh superintendent's comments on mental health issues.
Um obviously uh fire is not immune to those.
And just to give you a couple of examples, um they are on the rise, uh, not only affecting the fire service, but our bylaw officers as well.
Um homeless issues are um on the rise.
Um interactions with those people um are becoming more and more um violent.
Uh in uh July, our bylaw enforcement officer was assaulted, um, and the RCMP are investigating that uh behind the casino and a homeless camp.
So we're looking into those issues.
Um the um yesterday uh two of our firefighters were involved with a gentleman down at six mile uh running up and down the highway with a knife, threatening vehicles and cars.
Uh he was tased in the middle of the highway and arrested and taken away.
So uh when when the superintendent speaks about mental health uh being on the rise, it's definitely on the rise.
And that transfers over to fire when we go to these medical aid calls.
Uh we're seeing an uptick in suicides and suicide attempts uh with mental health issues.
So it it is an issue that is affecting um the community.
Um VGH, um, we've had 43 false alarms to VGH this year.
The majority of those is people smoking inside the hospital, the um and outside the premise.
What's happening is uh people are spending such a disproportionate amount of time in the emergency waiting to see a doctor that if they leave the building to go have a cigarette, they lose their or they miss their line.
So they're going into the washroom to either smoke drugs or smoke cigarettes, and they're setting off the building's fire alarm system.
VGH, every time that happens, they're uh fined for that.
Uh it's a $500 ticket for every false alarm.
So we've collected on most of those 43 uh false alarms to date.
There's also a uh program of, I'm still trying to wrap my head around it, of harm reduction for a certain clientele in the hospital that allows them to smoke drugs in the hospital under the care inside the hospital.
So we're working with VGH on that right now to try and wrap our heads around that harm reduction plan that's being put in place for some of the populations in the hospital.
To speak to the Hallowell Road property, mayor, we're trying to we're working to find a PR right now because it is owned by the province.
We've received several calls to that property for uh miscellaneous fires and homeless camps.
However, the the province owns the property, therefore they are the landlords.
So we have no authority to tell people to leave that property.
So we're trying to track down someone we can say, you have a you have a camper on the property.
What would you like to do?
We we want to avoid a situation where we remove people from that property, and the province says, Well, I don't have a problem with them there.
So we're we're working to try and locate that stream of um contact for that piece of property.
And uh Chief, I've got a meeting with the province at the end of this month, and I'll bring it up that way.
That'd be helpful.
Thank you, Mayor.
Um wildfire season is um wrapping up and winding down.
We had uh Captain Petrie was in West Kelowna as a task force leader for that event.
He was there for about uh 14 days.
Um statistically, um May and June, 198 emergency files, uh July, August, an uptick 215, and we're seeing probably we're gonna exceed that for the months of uh September and October.
So the the calls for service, not dissimilar to the superintendent, are are on the rise.
Um we are um just to give an example, so in the reporting period of July and August uh 14 structural fires we responded to, there were eight deaths in V-Royal in that uh reporting period, and then we had a drowning and recovery uh up at Prior Lake uh during the reporting period.
Um I'd be remiss if I didn't, and I mentioned this last time the work that's being done at Thetis to limit our responses.
This summer, seven responses to the lake, three medical issues, two rescues, and two fires in the park.
The last fire, Barker and Highland, we anticipated we'd be contacted by the residents who live north of the fire, and we have been, and would be working with them in a neighborhood meeting to address their concerns of escape, access, firefighting capabilities up in that area.
It is a bit of a it's a completely remote area to the town.
It's a on a good day, it's a 17 18 minute drive uh from the station to that location.
So the reality is is if you live in that area, you have a very clear understanding of your level of fire protection.
Even on a good day, we're we're not gonna get there in time to save your house, probably.
It's um at that point, then it's protecting the rest of the forest.
So we'll be meeting with that neighborhood over the next couple of weeks.
Um and um IFF collective bargaining continues.
We have some dates coming up in uh September and October, and we're working through that process.
I will now uh be happy to answer any questions that you have.
Thank you, Chief.
Uh any questions for our chief?
Uh Council Rogers, please.
Yeah, a quick one.
Uh thanks, Paul, for the report.
Yes.
Um we dodged the bullet again on on forest fires and extreme fire settings and so forth in the Kappa region.
It's quite amazing.
Except for the few lightning strikes um, I think in in the um sip watershed, but that was quickly dealt with.
Um thanks again for your help on the Sake and all.
You you mentioned um bylaw dealing with more and more homeless uh circumstances.
On what category uh in the bylaw report would um those before I think where Brad's put those statistics under parks in public?
Um that's where I would think he is um is putting them.
I'll clarify with uh with Brad on that one.
Um you know, uh you know, give you an example.
I mean, we on Friday uh we had to deal with a homeless issue.
Uh an individual is sleeping in the portal potty in Portage Park.
Um right now, uh Bylaw is working with MOTI.
Uh there's a large encampment underneath the Burnside Bridge at Burnside and Watkiss, about 10 10 tents under that bridge.
Yep.
So, you know, BC Transit probably spent a million dollars remediating the stream.
Unfortunately, 500 meters upstream, it's uh the toilet for a homeless camp of 10 tents and numerous people who come and go.
So we're working with MOTI right now, and that is all going to fall in conjunction with, I guess, this rapid bus lane and the expansion and the changes that are happening in there.
But we're trying, they're gonna be working with the RCMP to get no trespassing signs put up so that at least the RCMP can enforce.
Because it's getting to the point where, quite honestly, our bylaw officer is it's a one-man show, and working alone and dealing with these individuals is not a is not a safe practice.
So it a lot of these files I think we're going to be referring to the RCMP, which will unfortunately put a burden on uh Todd and his people.
Appreciate that.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Uh Chief, is there any other questions for uh Chief Hirst?
I just wanted to say hi, Don.
Yes.
Uh Don, we see you in uh larger than life.
And uh I'll carry on with the chair if that's okay with you and drive us through because you probably can't see everybody.
But I I think um you uh your uh report was well received, Chief, and uh we can move on to the next agenda item.
I just maybe uh we should uh receive um the reports from washore police and cattle animal control and and the police uh pause reports just move receive to them all yeah here second uh it's uh we've got a mover and a seconder all in favor of receiving the reports any opposed seeing none opposed motion carries and i think that moves us down to a building department report thank you paul move a shape second we've got a uh do you want to hear it or do you just want to receive it?
Is that what you're suggesting?
I I think it's pretty evident, uh, although it's really remarkable how uh how much we've had uh such extraordinary permit revenue for this fiscal year.
Yeah.
Thank you.
All those in favor of uh receipt?
Any opposed?
Seeing none opposed, I believe this brings us down to um Councillor Brown.
Are you prepared to talk about your new business community policing?
Well, it was discussed uh in brief, uh I think with Todd uh previously.
Is Todd there or is it Steve?
I think they both left.
Oh, okay.
Yeah, it was a it was a discussion with uh uh council uh uh counselor mattson and myself about you know looking into the possibility of having a uh uh community police station, possibly um in the uh I'm not gonna say where, but uh in one of the malls or possibly even on First Nations land.
And uh I know uh Superintendent Preston thought it was a good idea to look into it.
And and uh uh Counselor uh Madsen said he thinks there may be some funding available if if we were were to include the songhis and the squamalt nations.
So basically what what I'm uh looking for is perhaps a motion just for uh Superintendent Preston to to to explore this idea of a community police station.
Thank you, Counselor Brown.
Um go to councillor lemon, uh just potentially with questions first before motions.
Councilor Lemon?
Yeah bonjour bonjour for moi bon after vous uh very very well done um uh don in your absence i took because we had superintendent preston here um i asked him if that was something that he would welcome and uh what he said and and i and i did say you know you hadn't asked me to speak for you um but i just put the question out to him and he he he said he'd rather have bodies you know he said if the you know when it comes down to the the the the dollars of this he would rather have bodies so i'll just you know i'll just put that out to you yeah i'm looking at it uh in another number of different ways well well for one uh some of the community place police stations throughout the province are are meant almost exclusively by volunteers so um it would take some load off although in some ways when you have a community police station it increases your call for service because it's making it easier for people to come in and make the you know the the the complaints of theft of bike and that type of thing um also i'm looking at the fact that uh the the building, the polluted police building may be delayed.
I know uh one one uh uh council's already delayed their funding for 18 months.
So if that happens, I know uh Superintendent Preston will be looking for other spaces to uh house some of the smaller departments, and this may be an opportunity as a short-term measure to help them out in some of the space uh requirements they're looking for.
Uh it may be a total uh not not doable because if it's if it's uh costly, it may not work.
But I think it it's worthwhile looking into.
Um there there's um a variety of different uh examples of uh successful ones that are that are uh ladiesmith's one I can think of at the top of my head.
But um again, it doesn't hurt to to explore that idea.
Thank you, Councillor Brown.
I think Councillor Uh Rogers has a question, then Councillor McKenzie, please.
Yeah, um it it it's again interesting.
Uh it was uh um uh we heard that um the mental health unit, um, they have no space in their building for the mental health unit.
And so there uh sounds like uh arrangements are being made for them to have uh accommodation or space offices uh with um the municipal senate uh Langford Municipal Hall.
So that might be a case in point of us getting some uh some sense of the numbers, the cost, the requirements, um, so we can really have some tangibles um on what that would be involved with that um uh those that three person unit.
I think it's uh their team is anyway.
So it it is uh an example where uh Todd can keep us posted on and and maybe even Langford can uh detail the costs and what it would uh be what involved for us thank you thank you counselor Rogers Council McKenzie please yeah I think I would need um a lot more information both in terms of the intention benefits and and the costs uh and I'm not sure if whether the RCMP will have the capacity to do a report like that.
Um so I'm just thinking here on the spot who the appropriate body would be to do that uh research and come back to us with a report, whether it's us or the RCMP.
Thank you, Councillor McKenzie.
I think that's a question for staff.
I I believe it would be an RCMP kind of report that they would provide back, but I'll I'll uh get staff to comment on that.
It would be primarily something from the RCMP.
However, staff would also want to comment.
Thank you, Ken.
Councilor Matson, please.
I mean I mean one of the reasons I mentioned this to Don in the first place was one of the officers I was speaking to said that if there's a a link between the the nations and and and you know, housing, uh whether it's a community committee, whatever respect you call it or just uh a substation, there could be potential for federal funding.
But I guess what Don has asked in his motion is we just ask that there are review to be done so that we can get an indication of some of the ins issues that uh my colleague here just mentioned, like what are the benefits to the town, what are the costs, and then we can make a decision on whether it's just too expensive or not.
I mean, one of the things I think is really important is um uh it's just the public access or the public perception that we have better RCMP services here.
All you know, contrary to what the inspector said, in terms of cars sitting around here very you know on street corners and things, um I just hear the same complaint over and over again that we don't see the RCMP enough.
And so us having a substation in the town, if it's viable to do it, I think is just a great idea.
And while we're at the point of kind of formulation here, I think there's two things that are occurring.
One is um uh visibility, well, maybe three things.
Uh the other one is investigating Councilor Brown's um uh uh agenda item uh for for a a community policing.
And then the third thing is a requirement uh for housing some of the RCMP units while they're building even now their their overcapacity and building.
So if um if we would like to make a motion that I would uh petition counselor uh uh Preston and staff to get back to us on uh value cost benefits then we could do that counselor Qualitage good afternoon counselor Brown welcome to the meeting uh I just want to uh first of all obviously compliment Councilor Brown's motion on promoting community policing in the West Shore certainly we can all get behind that uh in spirit uh I I will uh caution uh my colleagues that right now the RCMP are understaffed in Canada.
The RCMP are continually asking for more staffing, whether it be Sworn or civilian members.
And locally here uh we're facing a potentially new build for an RCMP building.
I am of the opinion that those priorities are much higher than focusing on a community policing satellite office that, in my uh opinion, of watching Superintendent Preston today really didn't have in his top level of priorities.
Counselor Kowitz.
Yeah, I think there's an opportunity too for uh a developer.
They're developing a uh um there's several on the goal right now, and some of them are looking at very small uh uh commercial space.
So perhaps again on a temporary basis, it could be even a pilot project, they could use those smaller spaces uh for a small community police station.
Um where I'm at right now, it's a very small community, 556 people, but they have a police detachment here, and it's only open two hours a day, five days a week, but um it's small, right?
And it again it doesn't have to be uh staffed by full-time by regular members.
It could be, well, Constable Brewer, for example, does his First Nations policing, and that could be an office for him.
And if you have a the the member that's designated to work in View Royal that particular day, uh they could start and finish their shift if they kept a vehicle at the community police station.
So again, it's another uh issue to look at.
You gotta look at the security.
If you hire volunteers, you gotta make sure they have security clearance um uh not only for themselves, but also for any computer equipment that goes in there.
So yeah, there's a lot of issues, but I think it's worth looking at because I know some community places police stations haven't worked and they've closed them, whereas others have have been very, very successful.
And in some ways it can take the work off of the constables.
Um particularly if they can stop in the community office and do some other paperwork or or have a sta workstation they can work at.
Thank you, Councilor Brown.
Any other comments on it?
You're you worship if you suggested a motion.
Um Yeah, I think uh I'm just looking at Councillor Brown's uh wording here, and it almost appears like a motion.
And Counselor Brown, I don't want to put words in your mouth, uh, that staff uh work with the West Shore RCMP to explore the possibility, but we're really asking for a report, right?
Um so if we uh modify that to say that uh the motion is that staff work with the West Shore RCMP to explore the possibility of establishing a community police station um uh in View Royal.
And I think uh um uh I can amplify that with uh an email to Sergeant Preston, but we're looking at value.
I think I heard from Councillor McKenzie, we're looking at and and that includes like uh will will that provide um the intended effect that I think Councilor Brown is uh suggesting with solution, but part of that might well be could could View Royal offer uh opportunity for interim housing whilst they're uh under construction.
So uh uh Counselor Brown, would you be happy with that motion?
Yeah, I'll I'll move that motion.
Thanks very much.
Okay, do we have a seconder for Councillor Brown's motion?
Second.
Seconded by Counselor Mattson.
Again, this is a report for our staff on the West Shore RCMP.
Um all those uh would you like to move, Councilor Brown, or if you feel you you moved enough?
Yeah, I'll move that motion or or second it for Braun must make it.
Either way.
Do you want to motivate?
I'll make the motion, yes.
I think I've said enough.
Okay, and do you want to motivate folks?
I think it's uh it's certainly could be value, and yeah, short term it could really help the RCMP out.
Thank you.
Uh Councilor Matson, do you want to motivate?
Okay, all those in favor?
Councilor Quellish, please.
Uh just so I'm clear for my colleagues and constituents, I'll be supporting this in exploratory fashion only.
Thank you, Councillor Qualitage.
Any other comments before we set the vote?
Uh all those in favor?
Any opposed?
Seeing none opposed, motion passes unanimously.
Thank you, Councillor Brown.
I think we move now to the next agenda item, which is Councillor McKenzie for a building retrofit strategy.
Yes, and the title is a bit um uh might be misleading because I'm actually not proposing that we develop a building retrofit strategy at this time, although that will probably come in the future once staff has a bit more capacity.
But for now, what my motion is is that we write a letter to the province, similar to Sanage and some other municipalities, uh, to ask for regulation of gas utilities.
So I've attached the letter that they sanitage sent, and um I guess I'll I'll do a little bit of motivating now, or do I should I ask for you you can motivate whatever you choose and you could include it in here.
I just wonder if you could explain what a building retrofit strategy is.
Well, so we we've come up with a lot of new regulations or bylaws around new builds.
And in the future we're gonna have to tackle the renovations that need to happen with the older, the older builds to also tackle GHG emissions.
So that would regulate more the the current buildings going forward and renovations.
Thank you.
I'll second that.
Um now that it's on the floor and formally has a seconder.
Counselor Rogers, please.
So so I'm if I'm clear then, um the real focus is Sanitz's letter to the province, right?
And um so and I think you're Councillor Lemon, that's where you're seconding.
Yes.
Um so yeah, I totally agree.
Uh I think the Sanch letters is amazing.
Um they've they've been, I think there's another Miss Richmond who has uh has also uh done a similar so um a letter in support of uh those those that correspondence whether or not we need to repeat all all what Sandich has, but um uh to lend our voice and support.
Uh thank you for bringing it up forward.
I agree.
I'm okay with the letter.
Any other comments.
Councilor Brown, I'm just checking in with you.
Did you have any comments?
No, I'm gonna be voting for it.
Okay, and uh we'll just go to the mover and seconder.
Uh did you want to motivate further, Councillor McKenzie?
No, I think we've done a lot uh to diminish the role of gas utilities in in our town, but I think having this ask of the province to regulate the industry will be key to the bigger scale and meeting our provincial climate targets.
So thank you.
And just um out of curiosity, I do recall Nanaimo actually coming up with something a little bit more aggressive, didn't they recently?
Didn't they ban gas uh by a certain date?
Sorry, worship.
Didn't Nanaimo um make the same motion that we did, and that was that there be no more um gas in New Built.
I think it was the same.
I think you might be correct.
So for uh the the motion on on the table now, I'm I'm happy to uh support it.
Uh if there's no further discussion and nobody else wants to motivate aside from Councillor McKenzie, then all those in favor.
Any opposed?
Seeing none opposed, motion carries unanimously.
And I believe we are down to me passing councillor Brown's baton to you, Councillor Lemon for the Arts and Carson.
Thank you, Mayor Tobias.
Um, the world of arts and culture has been on pretty much a hiatus, um, save for a couple of library meetings early in in August.
Um, I'm just off today.
Very, very, very, very full day.
I've had two library meetings already today.
Um, I'm on a working group towards the next strategic plan, and then there is a planning and policy meeting, which I, you know, they're in camera.
But I can tell you that as I think I mentioned at the last committee of the whole meeting, that uh their staff has been asked to report back and look at removal of fines within the library system.
Um and I understand as of today's meeting, that most most um the majority of libraries in British Columbia are fine free.
So finding a way of how to do this and how to make it work, um, it's it's the right time.
So I will report back on that.
And um other than that, um, if you you know, if you have a library card, all of you here at this table, um, if you have a library card, just to reiterate, repeat that you can access the New York Times every day, and it's great.
And that's it for me.
Thank you, Councillor Lemon.
Are there any questions for Councillor Lemon on Arts and Culture?
Councillor Qualicks.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Uh the fine free, I want to call it a movement, uh, maybe that your board is looking at.
Is there any history background on that?
Does it have to do with um promoting more individuals from different socioeconomic statuses to to you know take out books, etc.?
If can you elaborate on that?
And uh quite interested in that.
Precisely.
Um thank you.
The uh one of the strategic priorities of the board is um access to services and and fines are an impediment to some people, many people perhaps, to being able to fully enjoy and appreciate the all that the library um system services um affords.
So it will, you know, just it will remove a barrier that makes it challenging for many people, especially perhaps now as we as we as we've heard, you know, this morning of all the people that are struggling, how you know um stores are challenged with keeping you know tabs on their stock.
Um it's a difficult time, difficult time.
So I'm I'm I'm very proud of this initiative.
So thank you.
Any other questions?
Uh I'll have questions when um when the the issue comes back again in a formal analysis and we can get a sense of uh what it may cost uh in in a uh municipal budgeting process.
Okay, yeah, I'm I'm sure there'll be something coming up in that regard.
I'm warned.
I I I did have two uh one question.
I guess uh uh part of this will go to you, Councilor Lemon, part of it will for staff.
I remember us I remember me bringing something up and perhaps it created a bit of discussion and one was that um kind of a comparative analysis between if council wanted to uh make its main branch the West Shore branch vice the downtown branch.
Did we have a motion and has council uh or has um uh does did staff write that down and as an action list or do we need a motion to formally investigate that I'll pass that to Kim.
We we did have a discussion about those those issues and I committed to preparing a report for council.
I have met with the um executive director of the library.
I'm meeting with her tomorrow and again next week so I'm hoping to have that done in early October.
Thank you Kim and uh one of the big questions that I had was how many people in View Royal have a library card?
And this isn't to say it it's it's not a bad thing.
It's like what can we do to promote it a little bit more?
Council then I I can help you with that um that came up at in one of the August meetings and uh the library system does not have um municipality by municipality numbers on library courts cards um so there is a um project pending or you know starting to be underway in which they collect um postal codes that will give some more of an idea.
It's not precise, but it will give an idea.
So that's that's out there, but um it will be more helpful.
Uh thank you.
And then lastly, uh with the fall newsletter coming out, if you had anything for promotion for the library that you'd like to forward to me to include in that newsletter, then we could do that.
I'd happily thank you.
Thank you, uh Councillor Lemon.
And I think you're tossing it back to me for finance and news.
Over to you, Mayor Tab.
Thank you.
I'll uh skip a chair's report uh for the convenience of time, and I don't believe we have any business arising.
We can dig into the first staff report, which is the Financial Plan Review for Protective Services.
I think that's you, Don.
And compliments on uh a great report.
Thank you, Mayor and Council.
Don Christensen, Director of Finance.
I appreciate your time, and uh uh I have uh this presentation and another one uh coming up, and they both have five slides.
You'll be happy to hear, I'm sure.
So we'll we'll just jump right in.
This report is the second of a series leading to our financial plan discussions for the 2024 to 2028 financial plan.
This one focuses on protective services.
You see the list just kind of generalized of the types of things that are included in protective services.
For fire protection, I should clarify, 10 full time staff, two part time staff, and as you know, are very well supported with volunteers.
They provide fire protection, training and education, emergency planning, and of course, we've got building inspection in this category as well, bylaw and other protective services, which does include animal control.
Police services, of course, are provided under the RCMP, and that is a contracted service coming out of the West Shore detachment.
So you'll see here that while what you're looking at, and this is uh hard to read on the screen, I appreciate, but it is attached to the report, kind of the details that is the focus of this uh report.
Primarily, most of the revenue supporting these services is coming from taxation.
You'll you'll see that in general, all told, this division is responsible for only 4% of View Royal's revenue.
Most of that is coming from through fire protection and emergency planning service agreements with our neighboring First Nations and municipality, primarily Callwood, and of course building permit revenue does make up a good chunk of that as well.
When we look at expenses, you can see that policing is responsible for about half or nearly half of the expenses of this division, with fire services coming in at 38%.
And that really is kind of tells the story.
The RCMP contract is in the blue section of that graph, being the contracted services with RCMP, but there are other contracted services as well: fire dispatch and crest being one, being two more.
And when we look at what the money pays for goods and services, being those contracts that we have, labor primarily for fire and municipal employees for policing through Langford's contract, and then very little um else for insurance and um utilities and so forth.
That is my report I'm happy to um um you know answer the questions that I can or direct them to other staff that might be able to help thank you Don uh Council McKenzie Thank you Don I think one of the reasons I was interested in in these reports is because I have my budget brain on and thinking where we can identify possible savings if necessary in in each of these areas.
So I know it's not really a question for you, um, as it would probably be for uh Superintendent Mc Preston or uh the fire chief um to identify you know where where are where is there room for potential uh wiggle room if if we needed to do that um yeah council McKenzie Tom if I may I I could make just a a little bit of a general statement and nothing specific that being View Royal primarily contracts out much of the work that is done i e our CMP crest um our Surrey dispatch center we sign on to those contracts, and typically that is for a time period uh after which we would get a chance to re-evaluate that that comes by periodically.
But once it's into a contract, there's I would say from year to year, very little opportunity to change the dollar value of those contracts, unless they are, of course, based on a metric that is that we have some control over.
So the other big component of our expenses that ViewRaw Council has control over through its CAO is staffing.
However, every staff represents work and service that is to be done at the direction of council.
So my suggestion would be that if you are thinking of cutting costs, what you're really thinking about is cutting services.
Because that's kind of the only way to do it.
And that is going to be limited to those services, you know, at a certain point in time that are not contracted out.
I mean, yes, you could you could you know blow something up and think of building it right from the ground up again, but that that would be a fairly big exercise, and and um may or may not achieve uh you know what what you're looking for.
So that's just kind of a general broad statement of of when you when when council says um we need to cut costs, what I'm hearing, and and I don't know that i can speak for all of staff but what i'm hearing is what would council like us not to do so if that is expressed in that way then then you know possibly we can get back to council with okay if we don't mow the grass but every but once a month it's gonna save you x number of dollars right so so just kind of thinking along those lines yes thank you and i i appreciate i appreciate that and my comments not just specifically to protective services it's something as we go through each of the areas that I I just like to keep in my mind and look for ask that question yeah is do we want to continue with the current level of service or do we want to see if we change that and uh therefore the budget might change.
Thank you.
Thank you uh Counselor Rogers.
I see no keep ignoring me.
I'm used to you being online counselor Matson I just wanted to compliment uh Don, you and your staff for putting this report together.
It was uh one of the times that you brought everything together quite nicely and uh you know even though I've been doing this a long time, I haven't really seen a report like this that sort of outlined so clearly, you know, who's doing what and where and what the costs are and where the funds go from.
So I just wanted to thank you for that.
Um, I was just in Port Hardy and I was advised that uh probably because of the level of training the fire ha department has that they aren't all actually aren't allowed to go into buildings once they're on fire.
And so again, it's I mean, one way you could save money is to have a less well trained fire department, etc.
But uh the way the province has now done things in terms of the requirements, I'm always amazed at how much training goes on and the the the quality of the staff that we have and then what the volunteers go through.
But it seems like that's a minimum that's necessary for us to provide the services that we do, and otherwise we're I don't know, breaking windows and putting hoses in them anyways so compliments to our chief and staff and compliments to Don for a very thorough and understandable report thank you thank you Councillor Matson uh counselor Rogers yes uh thanks again for the report I guess the um and you know when we talked about the the expenses uh up until this year it uh begs the question where are we going for the next uh five and uh all I keep thinking thank goodness we built the fire hole when we did.
When we considered the inflation factors um the cost of equipment um and so forth uh it's uh it would be untenable, I think, nowadays um uh to even consider um uh the chief raised an interesting point, and and that's the union negotiations, and what are the those future costs uh that uh may be a factor here?
Um I'm just an another point of um um I I think that's really important to note is the work on efficiencies, coordination, cooperation with the the other West Shore municipalities and and uh their fire departments.
You know, that's the scale of efficiencies that um I I think are going to um convince the public that if there's going to be tax increases, we took care of every other possibility first.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councillor Rogers.
Is there any other comments or questions for Don on this?
Councillor McKenzie?
Or Councillor Brown.
That's not ideal, is it zooming in?
Yes, thank you.
But anyway, um, Don, yeah, you also meant you didn't mention animal controls uh as a contract service.
And I think contracting out is a great saving in itself.
And I think I believe you have a report coming up in the agenda talking about the uh uh savings.
It's not a great way to save, but if you don't fill those RCMP officer positions uh fully, I notice some money comes back to the municipalities at the end of the year.
But I believe you're reporting on that later tonight, are you not?
That's correct.
Thank you.
Okay, great.
Uh yeah, that's it.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Councillor Brown.
Yeah, the only um comment that I have is I recollect that uh SUK Fire Department a few years ago were struggling to keep volunteers during the day, uh, mainly because a lot of them work for national defense.
Uh so it had uh they had really very few firefighters during the day, and everybody's insurance rates went up in town because there was inadequate fire service for it.
So even though we may say say we're saving money in something, we're actually passing that on with a greater risk to the public.
So uh so it's just uh something to keep in mind when particularly for protective services, uh the trade-offs um may have an unintended effect for cost down the road.
Um so I think the uh we need to receive um Don's report.
So uh so we've got uh mover.
Uh mover and a seconder, counselor rogers moves, counselor mattson seconded, all in favor of receipt.
Uh passes unanimously.
Um, and then we'll move down to police operating reserve requirement forecast update again, Don.
Thank you again.
Yes, this is a report that uh has been a little while in coming.
It was last uh or something very similar was presented to council in 2020.
And what we're here just thinking about today is really a single reserve.
It's called the police operating reserve.
We talked to you about it in 2020 for those that were here then, and we're looking at it again.
And really the purpose of the report is to determine whether or not the reserve level is sufficient to for a specific scenario.
And that scenario is when the population of View Royal hits 15,000, and we know that the policing costs are going to go from 70% of pooled cost to 90% of actual costs.
So we ask several questions about that, and we're going to get to those.
So that is a jump.
First, let's look at what is what are the inflows and out uh outflows for the police operating reserve.
Well, you'll know that of course any budgeted contributions to the reserve that would be coming from property taxes, that's one way to get money into the reserve.
And we did talk about that at our budget discussion last year, and or sorry, earlier this year for the 2023 budget.
Also, and counselor Brown uh just alluded to this.
One way to that we do contribute money to this reserve is whenever in any fiscal year there is a positive difference between what is taxed through property taxation and what the actual cost is for specifically for policing services.
So if that happens, the surplus goes into the reserve.
What is what comes out of the reserve is if we uh plan on and actually see uh funded um funded per either personnel or perhaps in the future debt service costs.
That's that would be a uh legitimate expenditure from the to be funded from this reserve.
And and the the uh corollary to what we just talked about which would be if there was a deficit you would see that negative difference being funded from the reserve from this reserve as well and I do refer you to page two of the report that shows just a little bit of history about uh since 2020 what has happened with the with the reserve and you will see we have had surpluses and we have had one year where there was a deficit is there any questions about conceptually what I'm talking about so far you're with me perfect.
Um okay, so then we get to the questions.
The biggest question being when when is our population being viewer all's population going to hit 15,000?
And you will see as an attachment to the report, there is a little bit of a I don't know if you call it a heat map or what you would call it, depending on whether your assumption of population growth is between one and a half or one percent and five percent is kind of the scenarios that I've run.
Um, it would it would, you know, kind of change um when that number hits five hits 15,000.
And of course, we know that nothing is linear as in as in my pretty little chart.
It's gonna it's gonna vary from year to year to year, but this is just kind of saying, well, what if, right?
What what if it was one percent a year or three and a half percent a year or five percent a year what you will notice is that if I I've got blue lines on that on on that attack on that schedule that indicates when the census years are and you will notice that the earliest number assuming a five percent population growth where the population hit exceeds 15000 is in 2027.
However, the census year is in 2026.
So we might assume that if the population doesn't hit 15,000 until 2027, it's actually not going to affect the RCMP contract until the next census year, which would be 2031 and would affect the contract in 2032.
Do keep that in mind.
Where even if you assume a 5% population growth each and every year from now on, it isn't likely that we're going to hit 15,000 before the next census.
So then the next question is how much more will the RCMP contract cost?
So in the first year that the that we have to go from 70% to 90%, it's going to range depending on when what our population actually is, you know, at that point in time and what the um what what inflation has grown the cost of the RCMP contract between now and that point in time, between 850,000 and 1 million.
And you can see that again in your report on the little table on page three as being represented by the tax increase required with no phase in, being between 5.4% and 5.8% that's of taxation, right?
So what I'm saying by that is in the first year that we go from 70% to 90%, think of it as about a million dollars, and depending on exactly when, it will be between 5 and 6% tax increase if we don't fund anything from reserves.
Okay.
A 1% tax increase again, depending on at what point in time that happens, is going to be worth between, let's say 150 and 200,000, roughly.
So that's what that is worth.
And when I do the calculation on how much reserve funding is needed, then to phase it in, this assumes we're going to apply, we're going to uh you know, kind of subscribe to a phase-in plan of increasing property taxes at 1% a year until we get enough to fund the increase fully from taxation.
So that you know, being between five and six percent, it's going to take you know, say roughly five years, and it's going to require between two and two and a half million dollars from the reserve.
Okay.
And we just showed you in the reserve right now is about 2.1 million.
We're going to need between 2.1 and 2.45 million in the future.
And in the meantime, between now and then, there's the opportunity to contribute more to that reserve just simply from the surplus.
We do typically have a surplus more commonly than a deficit.
Does it deficits do happen?
But just generally thinking, I'm feeling like the reserve is sufficient to at least start down the path.
We're on fairly good ground, ready to phase in this cost increase when it sure should occur.
I think it's not likely to occur before 2027.
And in fact, I suspect it's not going to occur till 2031 at the earliest.
And I'm saying between now and then the reserve is sufficient.
So you can see here that all of the scenarios have the same kind of look to the charts in general.
This one, of course, is representing scenario C, which you see in your report.
You can see here that in scenario C, the population hits 20 uh 15,000 in 2027.
However, it wouldn't get captured until the census of uh uh you know kind of imp is implemented in 2031 and actually affects the RCMP contract in 2032.
And um yeah, I I'm sorry, I should have just uh gone through you can see in the in the blue chart there, the dark blue component to that chart represents kind of the funding from reserve that helps pay the difference in cost for the first five years as taxation increases one percent a year until it kind of catches up with what is needed to fund that in that difference.
Uh so you're suggesting that the 1% increase per year doesn't start until whenever we have to start paying at 90%.
That is what this uh plan suggests, yes.
Okay, that's correct.
Thanks.
Councillor Brown, please.
Counselor Brown.
Yeah, that's uh that makes a lot of sense.
So I think our new town model maybe should be 2027 or must.
We want to keep the population below 15,000.
So that gives us another four years of leeway.
But thanks for your report, Don.
So this uh made good sense uh to me, Don, and thank you for looking at different variables.
I I I wish I was as optimistic that we wouldn't hit uh 15 at the next census level, but um just just to confirm that contract um is usually the census is taken on your census year, but your data isn't exposed until almost you know, sometimes uh you get an early look about seven to eight months into it, but um that that um increase would occur the year after the census date, correct?
Yeah.
That is my understanding.
Great.
And uh Councillor Lemon and anybody else have uh comments?
Councilor Rogers, next.
Uh Councillor Lemon.
Another great report, thank you, Don.
And and um I you know I'm I'm I'm maybe extrapolating a bit here, but I think in a in um you know, kind of real life planning for View Royal, this kind of information or this information specifically um would be helpful for us in when we're considering our OCP um you know what what kind of um development do we want that will be revenue generating for us um which is the you know where where are tax revenues going to come from that will be most beneficial and um I you know it it it certainly got my my head going it's okay okay, you know, maybe we need to take um take this on board as we think about shaping our community over the next few years.
So thank you.
Councilor Rogers, please.
Yeah.
Yeah, thanks again for the report.
Uh it's gonna be it's an interesting um crystal balling, you know, when that 15 is.
Because you know, if you think of 2021 and we have 11,500, and you think of all the developments that we've had since 2021, um, you know, it it's it and the the ones that are coming along, and we look at the revenue that um you know, this this revenue this year has been twice uh that of 2021.
Um so yeah, I don't know.
Um I'm a pessimist.
I don't think we're gonna make it, you know, and um I think we'll have the numbers before, you know, on that census day, depending on when the census is.
If it's January 1st, no, probably we won't.
But if if this census is going to be in September, I bet you we will.
We'll have 15 at that time.
And it's interesting, you know, when we talk about percentages per year, we're we had thought of the uh West Shore parts of Iraq that we would wean that off of the casino at 1% a year.
Right, we were giving that some thought, so yeah, just like we did with the library.
So um, and now we've got the police, uh, one percent a year, and um then we had the place building, which it could be a 10% increase.
So, you know, if the placing was building 10 people, five, um staffing five, that's uh that could be a an interesting scenario for the residents of that time.
Thank you.
Councillor McKenzie, please.
Thank you for the report.
Um, I think alongside this, um I hope that our council will support the the you know the UBCM motions that I've seen around uh lobbying the the province for uh to review the RCMP funding structure.
I personally I I think you know the province has already shown that they're wanting to incentivize growth through the growing communities Fund.
So I don't see why they wouldn't review this too because it is a barrier to a lot of communities growing.
So fingers crossed that um something comes out of those uh that resolution thank you councillor McKenzie Councillor Matson yes thank you for the report um I too am pessimistic and I really do think we need to actually consider in in terms of development proposals you know when they would actually come on board in terms of being completed um and you know maybe ensure that these things are delayed until after the next census and I just some of these bigger projects given we already have like several several hundred units currently being developed as well as everything else that's happened so I I have some serious concerns that uh with as it was counselor rogers that we're gonna be at at that point uh at the next census and so I think we should seriously look at what the impacts are in terms of you know how how we can ensure that that doesn't happen until after the next census.
Thank you counselor Matson Counselor Qualitch thank you very much, Director Christensen.
It's always refreshing to see these kind of evidence-based reports that are backed up by facts.
Are other municipalities doing similar forecasting to project things like this as well?
Is that where you got the idea?
I am not sure whether whether they have done or or uh I'm I'm I'm certain that uh many do this type of thing all the time.
Um, but I didn't see another one like this specifically, no.
Great.
Yeah, no, it's just helpful for uh our decision making matrixes, all of us individually and collectively.
So thank you.
And uh the the casual observation that I have, given the cost of living, is it's not only what we've approved to develop that you know, if you walk go down Irkskin Lane or uh travel by a spire, you can see the progress.
Even on Old Island Highway, the stuff that was stalled is uh started up again.
Um but in my neighborhood one of the things I've noticed is that kids are not leaving.
In fact rooms are being rented out and you know we we we are looking at at bigger developments but what I'm uh proposing is that um the the um you know aside from building uh improvements and and uh additions uh I think the number per household is is growing just because of the cost of living kids are moving back home or rooms are being rented out, relatives moving in, so I don't see that part going down.
I think that will continue to go up.
So we'll start a pool with you, Don, about betting on uh the uh the next uh census results.
Um, but anything we can go for data, I think would help uh council out in decision making, and this is definitely one of them.
So thank you.
Can I get a motion to receive staff recommendation?
Move staff recommendation.
Uh seconded, uh all in favor.
Uh seeing councillor Brown's hand, none opposed.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you, Don.
I think you're up for the next one as well.
Thank you, Mayor Tobias.
I don't have a presentation for this one, it is simply our regular report that we bring to you every committee of the whole.
Um, it tells you up up to date where we are at with the budget, budget uh to date and projects.
I don't have any concerns at this point in time.
We will be continuing to add to this report over the next few months as we get a better feel for where we're going to land at the end of the year.
I have provided some comments.
Certainly happy to ask uh answer any questions if you if you will thank you Don I I noticed that Sanich recently had a budget meeting and they had an estimate out on their budget that wasn't so popular with um the people in Sanich.
I think they were looking at an 8.1%.
Are those things kind of just um uh again a a a bit of uh art and craft as well as budget, uh, or do you include those as well?
Just a little too soon for us here.
We we are starting on our budget work.
Uh staff do a lot of work of repairing their budgets, and uh we wouldn't be able to uh give any indication at this point in time.
That may be a good thing, Don.
Thank you.
Is there any questions for Don?
Move staff second to receive.
So we've got uh moved by Councilor uh Matson, seconded by Councillor Lemon.
All those in favor?
Uh none opposed.
Did Councilor Brown drop off or is he still up there somewhere?
No, you're still there.
Okay.
I I see your hand now.
Thank you, Councillor Brown.
And uh now to Kim uh for his CAO report, please.
I don't have a presentation for council.
Thank you, Mayor Tobias.
The recommendation is to receive the report.
However, if you have questions, our staff are prepared to respond to.
Thank you, Kim.
Council, do you have any questions for the CAO?
Councilor Matson.
Even though I wasn't a big fan of the design on the uh underpass there, I'm just wondering what we're doing to protect it.
Is it there's some sort of coding going to be going on it that graffiti proof it's a flip coin.
Uh yes, there is going to be a anti-graffiti coding on there.
Thank you, Cherry.
That basically makes it easier for uh for our workers to clean off anything that's required.
Okay, thank you.
Councilor Rogers, please since we're talking about the uh the artworks um I'm really impressed with one side not so impressed by the other.
So I I wonder if um you know we had a an a an assistant a professional to uh go through.
Do we have any quality control to determine that um um both sides were of the caliber that was presented to uh council for consideration?
Should have picked the other design.
Um we selected the artist um from the July 18th meeting on the proposals that were put forward.
One side was Western Red Cedar, the other was I think Doug Fur.
And uh I think one side is kind of like the the cone, and the other are those little I don't know what they're called from the Western Red Cedar with the cedar bow.
Um so that was what was in the the proposal.
I think the difference is perhaps that there's a few of the little cedar, I don't know what those little pieces are called, I guess seeds or pods on the the western red cedar bough that aren't there.
Um it's very similar to what was proposed.
If I may you worship um to be specific, um one side has a lot more definition uh than the other, um, in at least in my view.
Um so if if hopefully we can get the uh individual that um helped us um shortlist and seemed to have a really good artistic sense, if they could just ensure that um we did get the quality and did get um the product that uh we signed off for.
I will confer with her.
Thank you, Councillor Rogers.
Any other questions for Kim?
Seeing no other questions.
Moved uh by Councillor Lemon.
Um all those in favor.
Councillor Rogers seconds.
Seeing none opposed, motion carries.
And I think that brings us down to uh new business.
That's just before the um correspondence and closed meeting and evening break.
Uh and that's uh engagement prior to drafting policy.
Counselor McKenzie.
Yes, thank you.
I think this this past year, something I've uh kind of struggled with was is our process for policy development.
Um from my own policy experience, um, we we do engagement with groups, committees at the very start of policy making, whereas here I found have found that the process is for staff to develop the draft first and then to confer or engage with our committees.
So what I'm uh the motion, I guess that I'm raising is that when there is a motion on for a new policy that impacts PREAC or CDAC, that there's first a meeting with those committees to discuss some of the ideas that they would like to be considered in the policy.
And that's not to say that everything the that the committee's not going to entirely uh develop the the policy or everything that they recommend will be incorporated because sometimes there's best practice and legislative reasons why it's not feasible.
But the point is that this should be happening sooner rather than later in the process to potentially save time for staff and also to set up the direction that staff then goes um and and pursues.
So yeah if I can get a seconder on my motion.
Councilor Rogers, did you uh want to make a comment as well, Council Rogers?
Yeah sure and Council McKenzie, the uh staff's recommending that it be referred to staff.
Um that the they can so they can respond to the um uh the points and the thoughts.
Is uh do you have any concerns about m doing the referral for the staff so they can um consider the the uh the ask and and come back with some response to it?
Uh no, I I don't have an issue with that.
Was that sorry, where yeah, they the um in the committee whole sheet there there's a paper sheet that um a separate sheet whereas okay yeah and so the staffs are um asking that it be referred to staff for um you know a response back and and uh planning and what directions that we can go to.
Right, yeah, no, I would have uh no problem.
I would uh have to amend my motion, yes.
Um would you be uh amending your motion?
I would check on that.
Any other discussion on that?
Councilor Matson Blue?
Yeah, just uh one of the things I was pleased to see that sort of changed over time is the advisory committees are certainly available or do have the option of providing policy recommendations to us that you know currently.
Um so I'll be interesting to see what staff have to to comment.
But I just just for my colleague that there is lots of opportunity should they wish to do something new.
Yeah, and I sorry if I can uh respond to that.
I think they can, but a lot of the times their the policy recommendations are one line that comes to council.
And what I've heard from the committees is that they want to then give more detail than is possible in that one um you know line that comes to council.
So to then go back to them so they can flesh it out a bit more.
Thank you.
Um anybody else before I go back for seconds?
Counselor Brown, did you have a comment?
Uh no, no comment.
I I'm fine either way the way it is now or or with a revision.
The f the final result will be the same.
Thank you, Councillor Brown.
Uh yeah, I I think it's it's good practice to um do early engagement before policy development because that's why you usually develop your policy, and uh there's probably less risk of staff developing something that's not in line with what the committees want or what council wants is if we don't do that early engagement.
So that's my perspective.
Councilor Rogers.
Yeah, I'm sorry, there's this uh um one particular point, and and I know that we've been working on the uh developers uh checklist, and uh that might be an avenue where the the policy, the checklist is being reviewed, and and um that they could go to committees and to seek input and and thoughts and maybe perhaps comparisons to other municipalities.
Counselor Qualitz.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Uh thank you, Councillor Uh McKenzie for bringing this for consideration.
And I'm sure um I I think staff has probably had an opportunity to ponder uh this and gather at least some preliminary thoughts.
And I'm just wondering, uh I think this should be a quite an easy question.
Um are other municipalities uh engaging in uh engagement prior to drafting policy?
Do that is that something they that they practice regularly?
Is this common?
Is there any way we can get a comment on that?
I haven't canvassed other municipalities, however, I'm I'm pretty clear that in terms of process, the committees receive referrals from council and they they do things on their own initiative.
When staff develop policies, often it's in um consultation with our colleagues, our peers and other municipalities.
And we would never put something on a committee agenda without council's participation.
Council will not want to learn from the committee that they're working on a policy that council has not heard about at all.
And so the process that we have currently works well in that when we provide you with a policy or an indication that a policy development is underway, you can make a decision at that time to refer to the committee or have staff engage in the committee or not engage the committee at all.
Thank you.
Yeah, uh that's a that's a nice way of putting it because I think there's some certainly some semantics at play when it comes to engagement and drafting policy.
I think it's fair to say we probably are engaging on some levels at this point, uh, and that's quite a global statement.
But um to be continued, uh certainly worthy of more discussion.
Anyone else with other comments or questions?
Um we've got a mover and a seconder.
So all those in favor are referring councilor McKenzie's motion to staff, I believe is where we're going.
Uh all those in favor?
Uh any opposed?
Seeing none opposed, motion carries unanimously.
And going back to the agenda, I think we've got correspondence.
Um, I don't think we have any correspondence there at all until the end.
And then Sarah, overview for a closed meeting resolution.
And look at that.
Uh we're five minutes over where we thought we'd be, so not bad at all.
So what uh okay.
Uh all those can I get a motion and secondary for recess?
Uh moved by councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor McKenzie.
All those in favor?
Uh any opposed.
Seeing none opposed, motion carries to recess for the evening break.
Uh for those joining us online.
We will be back at seven.
Good evening and welcome back to the council of the whole for September 12th, 2023.
Um we have completed the afternoon session and a closed meeting, and now we're at a place where we are going to call to reconvene.
I think Sarah's talked to everybody in the room today about public participation, and if you wish to address council, it really helps if you state your name and address at the beginning, but also what agenda item you're talking about, because there's quite a few to help direct counsel to where your concerns lie.
Just keep in mind that council is a respectful place that people can share their opinions.
And if you're going to approach council with your advice and opinions, please treat others the way that you'd prefer to be treated.
As a reminder for those that are participating by telephone, if you wish to provide comments, call 778-402-9227.
And when prompted, enter conference ID 237 252-60 pound, and it should be on the slide on the website so you don't have to remember this.
At the appropriate time, I will announce the last four digits of your phone number.
Ask you to mute the live webcast to avoid feedback.
Ask you not to use your speakerphone to ensure sound quality, and ask you to unmute yourself by pressing star number six.
Uh can I get a motion to reconvene in a second or please?
Can I?
Move by counselor Rogers, second by counselor McKenzie.
All in favor.
Uh any opposed?
Seeing none opposed, uh, motion carries.
And I'll just note that councillor Brown is with us and he is online.
Uh this brings us to petitions and delegations, and I'd invite Mr.
Painter for the installation of noise mitigation on the Trans Canada Highway.
Mr.
Painter, please.
Thank you, your worship, and thank you, Council, for having me here this evening, as well as those joining online.
My name is Ryan Painter of One Choose O Court in the Thetis Vale community.
I have a presentation that I believe will be popping up here for you momentarily.
It should be.
There we go.
Thank you very much.
So this is for noise mitigation in Thetis Vale for community health and safety.
Next slide.
And next slide.
So I do want to acknowledge that I am in Thetis Vale community is on the traditional territory of the Lakwangan speaking people known today as the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations.
We're all very honored to be able to live, work, and play on that traditional territory.
It is truly an honor, and we should do as much as we can, as often and as frequently as we can, to recognize the history and where we are and the places that we're in.
Next slide.
So before we go too deep into what specifically we're asking, I want to bring you voices of the community so you can see uh where and who is actually speaking to this issue tonight.
It's not just me standing here, it is an entire community.
Next slide, please.
First, we're going to look at 114 Fetus Vale Crescent, Ron Stonehouse.
Next slide, please.
Ron says, I would like to ask that the town include traffic noise mitigation strategies to include the area on Six Mile Road from Atkins Road up to West Park Lane, as well as the exit from the highway onto Six Mile Road.
The frequency of large transport vehicles using compression brakes along this stretch of highway and along Six Mile Road, starting as early as 5 a.m., is negatively affecting the enjoyment of my home and neighboring and neighborhood compared to 5, 10, and 15 years ago.
I'm aware that this is not the first time this concern has been expressed by residents of Six Mile and Chilquin neighborhoods.
Next slide.
Next, we'll go to 2431 Lund Road.
This is from Sherry Fraser.
Next slide.
I'm writing as a concerned resident of our town regarding a matter that has become increasingly challenging for our community.
Over the past few years, I have noticed a significant increase in noise levels emanating from the highway near the Thetis Vale neighborhood.
This increase in noise can be attributed to the extensive development of buildings and homes in the surrounding area.
While I understand the need for development and growth in our town, the rising noise levels have had a noticeable impact on our quality of life.
The continuous sound of traffic, especially during peak hours, has become a constant source of disturbance for many residents in our community.
This disturbance affects our ability to enjoy our homes, our outdoor spaces, disrupts our sleep, and ultimately detracts from the peaceful and pleasant environment we once cherished.
In light of this concern, I would like to endorse Ryan Painter's proposal that the town council consider planting a barrier of trees along the highway at the minimum to help absorb and reduce the sound generated by passing vehicles.
Such a green buffer could not only serve as a practical noise barrier, but also enhance the visual aesthetics of our neighborhood.
I understand that implementing such a measure may require careful planning and resources, but I believe it would greatly benefit our community.
Overall well being, helping to enhance the livability of our area and ensure that it remains a place we are proud of and proud to call home.
Next slide.
2380 Chilcoe Road.
And we're hearing from Catherine Buchanan and Rob Smith.
When we moved in here in the fall of 2015, there was a fairly thick forest between us and the highway.
We only heard the odd loud engine, otherwise, it was just a distant highway hum.
Then all the trees came down to build the houses between us and the highway, which removed any natural noise barrier.
But it became much, much worse after the condo buildings across the highway were built.
It just seems like any vehicle noises reverberate off of those condos with nothing to stop it or absorb it.
I can't imagine how the folks who live closer to the highway feel not being able to sit outside and enjoy the nice weather, read a book, for example.
There are many studies about the health deter the health determinants of people when they live too close to a highway, particles from tires and exhaust, higher cancer rates, and the lack of enjoying peace and quiet.
I'm sure city council members are aware of this.
It's easy to Google and find them.
Weigh the cost of the healthcare need to fight environmentally caused cancers and the small amount needed to build proper barriers, and it's a no-brainer to try and prevent cancers, asthma, breathing problems, etc.
Aside from concrete just bouncing the noise back, which would make life miserable for folks across the highway.
Concrete is also more expensive to use and is not environmentally sustainable.
The sand used for making concrete is the finite resource.
I like the idea of placing a barrier that absorbs the noise and the addition of sturdy, native drought resistant trees and shrubs all around it.
Next slide.
Next we'll hear from Sandy Hall 9 Massey Place.
And you'll see on the map that this is actually quite close to the highway.
When we moved here in 2018, I stood at the upstairs bedroom window with my eyes closed, listening to how loud the traffic was.
I could hear some traffic, but it was tolerable.
But things have changed.
The development on the west shore has resulted in a steady and noticeable increase in traffic and related noise.
I've also noticed how much louder the traffic noise is since a large apartment complex went up across the highway from us.
The sound waves bounce off the hard surfaces of the building, amplifying the sound, making it more intense.
The noise now affects my ability to get sleep, to get to sleep, and to stay asleep thanks to loud trucks, jake brakes, motorcycles, and even street racers peeling onto the highway from the Thetis Lake on ramp.
It's very frustrating and disruptive.
There are studies that show traffic noise has been associated with issues like interrupted sleep, increased stress, cardiovascular disease, and more.
I know there are people who say, Hey, you bought your highway, so deal with it.
We are willing to live with the noise level when we moved in here, but things have changed noticeably as communities have grown, and more and more people head to work, to school, shopping, sporting, entertainment activities, and appointments.
Now at night I am awakened by loud mufflers, jake breaks, motorcycles, and squealing tires from racers blasting up the fetus lake on ramp to the highway.
During the day it varies, but there are times when it's difficult to concentrate.
If I'm reading a book in my backyard, conversations can sometimes be tough.
The increased traffic and activity also have resulted in an increased need for first responders and therefore more sirens.
I want to emphasize this was not an issue when we moved here, and we are willing to put up with a certain amount of noise, but what we are subjected to now is affecting us in our ability to enjoy our property.
Anything that can be done to help cut the noise, such as tree planting or adding a higher berm or a buffer wall, would certainly be welcome.
It should probably have been a condition of development in the first place.
And finally, from 2316 Chilco Road, we'll hear from Jamie Goodwin.
Oh, pardon me, this is Casey Place, pardon me.
Two Casey Place.
Six Casey Place, pardon me.
Linda and Boy, uh no, sorry, this is Jordan McIntosh.
I've got my notes a little screwed up here.
Pardon me.
I find it appalling that no noise mitigation has been approved for our neighborhoods.
The lack of a natural and artificial barrier between the Trans-Canada Highway and the neighborhood impedes our privacy for residents in their back and front yard and could possibly be a cause for permanent hearing loss if exposed for longer periods of homes built beside the highway.
This issue has been raised in the past by several taxpaying residents, and nothing has been done by the city or the province.
We moved from out of province into our home in 2022, quickly became familiar with the provincial noise policy and mitigation document after comparing our new neighborhood to others in the CRD that had adequate barriers to prevent and mitigate highway noise.
Although the neighborhood is not new, I was surprised that nothing had been done by the province or the city.
For our family of four, which includes two young children under the age of five, increased regular noise volumes are not a great start for their growing body.
Our house is located beside the Trans-Canada Highway, and homes near ours have felt the brunt of the government's inaction.
I know that moderate highway noise is unavoidable, and I recognize it was our choice to live in this neighborhood.
But I believe the government has a part to play to keep all neighborhoods to the same standard of safety.
Next slide.
Now we'll get to 2316 Chilco.
We'll hear from Jamie Goodwin.
We first moved into the Chilco neighborhood in 2010, and our house at the time backed onto the highway exit ramp.
We spent little time in the yard due to the noise, so two, uh so in 2017 decided to move up the hill to a quieter neighborhood.
Our backyard is all trees, and we love spending time up there.
However, we noticed that soon after moving, the noise from the highway became more and more noticeable and loud.
Our quiet, tree-filled backyard is no longer a peaceful, quiet place.
Since the condos were built by the Thetis Lake parking lots, the echoes of highway bouncing, uh the echoes of the highway bouncing off the condo building became so loud it is almost as if we might be back on the highway alone or on the along the highway itself.
Again, we're spending less time in our yard, which is such a shame because we moved here specifically for the yard and the peacefulness it offered at the time.
Next slide.
And this is Linda and Boyd Fairweather.
We agree this is a need for noise mitigation along the highway.
We have been here for six years and it's just getting worse.
The two apartment buildings seem to bounce the noise off the highway and bounce into the community.
The tree planting would help, but really feel a sound and safety barrier would be needed.
The little black fence prevents some highway debris from coming through, or not at all, and does nothing for the noise impact or the safety of people walking along the trail.
We would like to see a more solid sound barrier, safety barrier installed.
We love this community, and I'm sure everybody here would appreciate some noise reduction so our yards and parks could be enjoyed more.
Next slide.
Additionally, we heard some more comments from the community.
I went around and I've spoken with many, including early morning compression release of jake brakes.
Some saying they think this might be a policy bylaw violation.
There's also been quite a few discussions and comments made about a condition of sound detention in the community, should have been handled by the developer.
There should have been some kind of agreement with development in this area when it was first done 15 years ago or so.
And finally, concerns about cost downloading.
This is actually something that came up almost repeatedly with everybody who I talk to.
Concerns that asking the town to put the bill is actually bringing costs onto the city that should be borne by the province.
So I think those are concerns that are out there as well.
And I think it's important to notice those and recognize those.
Next slide.
Getting a little bit into the health.
Oh, sorry, we're going into a next slide about a bad situation.
So this is interesting.
Next slide, please.
If you go to Realtor.ca, you'll see that they actually grade a neighborhood based on how quiet it can be.
Next slide.
And they grade it from green to red.
Green is relatively quiet, and they don't really say what quiet means, but they say green is quiet, yellow is kind of in the middle, and red is very noisy.
Well, you can see in the Thetis Vale area, Chilco Park, you can see where that red and yellow really enters in to become quite a noisy and noisy place, especially down into Thetis Vale, around Chilco Park, up in Massey, up in Casey Place on Lower Lund.
And especially going from Chilco Road all the way up the Chilco Road road, there you can see it's it's an issue.
And then if you look into Atkins and Nursery Hill, those are also experiencing increased noise.
So, this is an issue that can be displayed in this way.
And I think this kind of helps show what we're dealing with.
Next slide.
In terms of what the experts say, Aaron Walker, assistant professor of epidemiology, public health at Brown University, talks about noise impacts on our flight or fight or flight response.
Your heart rate increases, you begin to sweat, you begin to release those hormones that get you prepared for battle, or you prepare to run away.
Ongoing stress leads to ongoing health outcomes, ongoing adverse health outcomes.
Next slide, please.
Hugh Davies, a professor in the School of Population and Public Health at UBC, has been studying the link between cardiovascular disease and noise exposure.
He's done studies specifically in Vancouver.
He's shown that heart disease rates are higher for people living in noisy neighborhoods, and there's a study from as recently as 2012 showing this.
Next slide.
Same results are shown for diabetes as well as reduced birth weights among babies born whose mothers have lived in noisy areas.
They've even shown that students exposed to airplane noise, and this is anywhere from 60 to 85 decibels, show lower reading scores.
For your record, when it's moderately noisy in our community, we're getting anywhere from 60 to 85 decibels.
Next slide.
The World Health Organization recommends an average noise exposure to road traffic should be no louder than 53 decibels during the day and not more than 45 decibels at night.
Most residential streets, according to the World Health Organization, rate around 43, 53 decibels.
Our decibel readings in our community show that we have anywhere from the low 40s to anywhere to the high 80s.
And this happens in the morning, this happens midday, and this happens at the end of the day as well.
And this is experienced certainly by those who live right in the community and who work from home, as I do.
Next slide, please.
So what are we asking for?
We're asking for the town to work with the province as best as they can to place sound absorbing buffering barriers along Fetus Vale, Nursery Hill, and Highway One.
We're also asking to ensure that future planning takes into account population growth along the highways and noisy corridors, and to require that developers implement noise mitigation strategies as they're coming to these communities.
We know that as affordability pushes people out of the core, people will continue to come to this area.
Development will continue to look to come to the West Shore.
And it will continue to be an issue where traffic is flowing through our neighborhood and through our community at increased rates.
It's not going to get better, it's going to get worse.
I have a petition of 175, 176 signatures, 140 which are from our local community.
I had 80 at this time last year when I just launched the petition.
Within about three or four weeks, I gave those to the MLA, Mitzi Dean.
She introduced those into the legislature.
She's supportive as a result of what we're asking for.
We've now gained more signatures in the time since that.
So I really hope that council can think about this.
Come and talk to the neighborhood if you'd like.
We're more than welcome to have conversations, but we would really love if you can work with the province and work with us to get something done.
Thank you, Mr.
Thank you.
Payner, and for the time and canvassing your community as well as putting together a really, really well put together brief.
So thank you for that.
For council's consideration, just to add on to uh Mr.
Payner's concern, of course, it has come to us before the petition was launched late last year and delivered to uh the legislature shortly after that.
I met with Mitzi Dean and representatives from Modi.
Moti passed on that it is not their practice to put in a sound barrier after a period of time.
So if they were building a new intersections or something, that would be a consideration.
But because we have built the neighborhood to the highway, Moti said that they would not uh fund a sound barrier there.
They did, however, uh give us permission to uh build a sound barrier there as well as to um uh reforest some of the embankment down to a point um that was um you know that would allow an upward drainage and and clearing, but uh some reforestration.
So where we're at now is that we have approval to do.
Um we have a problem, uh obviously, as as uh Mr.
Painter is reminded of us when I asked for funding for it, and I'll reach to Ivan for a second just before we go to comments from from council so we get the most updated, but um the suggestion there that Modi wasn't going to be a funding authority for it, and I think from our MLA that this was good use of the community, a growing community fund when that just got announced.
But I'll go to Ivan to see if this may qualify for.
I know you've done a study, Ivan, um, and uh whether or not this would qualify for any potential grants from the province or the Fed COVID.
Thank you, Mary Tobias.
I believe the Growing Communities Fund is the one.
Um there are other grants like active transportation grants and that that are currently in hand right now.
Um that probably would not apply because it is dealing with vehicular noise.
Um that said, staff can still uh comb grants to see if that's still applicable.
At this time, the the growing communities fund is is the sole one at this time.
Thank you, Ivan.
Uh any questions from council to Mr.
Painter or discussion.
Yeah, I have a question.
I know we discussed uh potentially reforesting the area and the embankments, and so but I can't quite recall what the outcome was because other than that, it it there were issues, and but it maybe if staff could clarify that help.
Yeah, thank you for the question.
Mary Tobias, there are some challenges with respect to um maybe not necessarily planting the trees, but uh maintaining them.
And it comes down to access to water.
Uh staff have combed the site, and there's no real easy way to get irrigation to that area.
So uh basically planting is one thing, but in order for them to get to a certain height, which will take a while, it does require a little bit of uh maintaining and watering.
And that seems to be the issue at hand right now.
Not to say that it can't be done, but it probably comes with a pretty hefty tech price tag and permissions from the ministry, obviously.
Thank you, Ivan.
Uh Councillor Rogers, please.
I I guess the uh concern I have with, you know, it's it's it's it may be an interesting effort, but the level of success I wonder about.
Um do we have enough width?
Do we have enough soil?
Uh when I look at the McClellan Trail, which I'm familiar with, um and and the existence of homes there already, um, and the lack of space to grow the uh the trees.
And how much how much trees to what height would be able to actually make any significant difference for a six-story concrete building or whatever on the other side, you know, because it's it's bouncing off six stories.
Yeah, so after the staff report, because the staff report that was done a while ago, it mentioned um the ability to put in a sound barrier.
Now, sound barriers, there's there's two schools of thought, and it really depends on what the acoustics designer says.
But it basically is either sound deflection or sound absorbing, and that needs to be figured out first.
Uh there has been um overall consensus, though, that trees will not improve noise or improve the reduction of noise, especially in that corridor because it is fairly thin.
So let's say you had two lines of trees, it would not provide a significant amount of noise reduction.
Not to say that it won't reduce it a minimal amount, but uh based on, you know, if we're to look at the the sole purpose from an engineering perspective to reduce noise um to levels that uh that Mr.
Painter's um report has has stated, you probably wouldn't do it.
Uh to carry on that point.
Um, you know, the the the trees that I that I think people are envisioning, um it's it's again, a very small amount of space with a very uh finite number of trees, and then you have six mile and the overpass where you can't plant the darn thing, and um, and that sound is still going to come through there.
And you know, the whole area is is a is a what a valley, if you like, mill hill and the other hill, you know, which will reverberate the sounds.
I guess the only thing we do is thank CRD for pl uh for building the uh the two buildings um, you know, back then in the day in CRD, I suppose um, you know, if we'd been constant, you know, we could have made a what an expectation of a contribution, but in actual fact, they wanted $920,000 of DCC monies.
So they were actually looking to us to give the money, not for them to compensate and address the sound reverberation around the uh the canyon.
Thank you.
Councilor Rogers, Councillor Mattson.
Uh uh Councilor Brown, please.
Yeah, thank you, Mr.
Pander, for your uh report.
Uh I just wonder if there's something we could be doing with the CRD to put some kind of noise sortion materials on those two buildings because they're uh CRD housing buildings, both of them.
Um I know it wouldn't entirely solve the problem, but any little thing we could do would certainly help.
Yeah, I can check in uh definitely with the CRD, but I think there's uh there's compounded problems, I think.
Uh Ivan, if there's usually a subjective report of increase since those buildings have been completed, we've also got issues that existed before they were completed with increasing noise as well.
Um would I I know you've got the majority of the staff report uh completed right now and perhaps could use a bit of a uh refresh.
Would it um uh what I propose is that we um uh uh ask um staff for some options, potentially updated costing.
And I think originally we had discussed an eco fence as well as a cement uh fence options, but I don't think you got a chance to to uh price out the the ecofence.
So the staff did engage with the ecofense um team, a very good team.
They gave us a lot of great examples that was done on the on the East in Montreal and that fairly similar uh applications.
Um we got as far as to them mentioning to us that uh they can't they're unable to provide a cost right now because it really comes down to additional detail design that's required.
And what I mean by that is that additional uh information from acoustics engineers required to determine whether or not the site would be suitable for sound absorption or sound deflection.
The cost and its impacts are dependent on which design is to take place.
So at this time, um the town doesn't have we haven't had any funds set aside for this.
Um that's why we haven't got as far as to engage them just yet.
It was kind of it was going to be something that may be addressed at a time of uh budget for next year.
Um but that said staff can look to see if we can find a nook and cranny in our budgets to see if we can do it now.
But uh again, we've had quite a few other priorities uh that the staff has also had to acknowledge.
Um staff can do the rest and see what we can do now, if not make perhaps part of the next budget process.
I think probably we would be looking for a report back before we made a commitment.
So was the just to be clear, was the um the ecofense company were they looking for money to do a study to determine the right types of panel to use vice getting the whole thing done?
And was that millions of dollars or was that a small amount of money?
Um, so the the general process would be would be this.
Um uh a acoustics engineer would be secured, and we have received a short list from the ministry whom they've used from time to time for their fences.
And once should the town wish to secure the services of that um that acoustic engineer, then at that time they'll do an assessment and provide a recommendation as to whether sound absorption or sound uh deflection.
After that, that would be the time when staff or the town would engage with the ecofense again, and then they would be able to price it out and provide us with an estimate.
So that would be a contractual service of an amount.
Um we do we know the amount that for the contractor, we'd have to put that out for an RP.
It'd have to be put out.
Um that eco fence is proprietary, so we'd have to go through the uh the purchasing components of that.
But that said, it doesn't it's not to say that it can't be done.
Um there we don't have an exact cost as I they've been fairly cautious about providing something to us.
The amount that we provided to council of the day before was based on the uh polymer fence or the polymer uh wall that was that the ministry have used recently.
I've seen them done right by the McKenzie Interchange.
They've done several in um right by the Telebridge, I think, in in Vancouver as well.
Uh so that was the number used for that.
We don't have an exact number for um for equal fence just yet.
Thank you.
Uh any other comments or questions from council?
But I think what uh we need some more information from staff because it's not it's a difficult place to build, as staff noted before, because it's on the point of uh a precipice and uh um perhaps looking uh at options from a staff report back to us uh potentially in October for what our next step should be is um if that's the will, we could uh come up with a motion, just direct staff to come back with an updated report on options available for us.
Um Councillor McKenzie, you had a oh no, I'll I'll I'll move that.
Okay, uh motion from Councillor McKenzie or moved, uh seconded by counselor Mattson.
Uh all in favor.
Any opposed?
Seeing none opposed, motion carries for a staff report uh to come back on options, updated options to alleviate the noise in Theatersville.
Thank you, staff, and thank you, councillors.
Um and I think that brings us now to public participation period.
So we'll go firstly to those in the room who wish to address council on any item on the agenda, including ones that we've spoken about, but hopefully ones that we haven't spoken about, so we could take that into consideration.
Please approach the microphone when you press it on.
You'll know it's on when you see a little red dot.
Is that right?
Great.
Okay, thank you.
Um my name is uh Kathy Witcher, and I'm the executive director of the Urban Development Institute, the Capital Region.
So I'm here to address the membership item on your agenda.
Um so thank you, Mayor and Council.
Um so UDI, I'm just here to give a little bit more context to our membership, and so um we kind of relate UDI as collaborators and educators.
Um uh this by way of of giving us you know kind of the thought that we're community builders with the partners that we that we work with.
Um so we're a nonprofit um organization and our members are made up of the development industry, so engineers, architects, developers, appraisers, lawyers, financial institutions.
Uh the majority of the uh, if not all, of the nonprofit housing providers are members of ours, um, as are some of the First Nations um organizations.
Um so some of the membership benefits that uh we have of of UDI are educational programming.
Uh we've we've created a nine-month uh program.
We did this during COVID because we saw that there was a gap in education.
There was no education for developers.
And so we've put together this nine-month program.
It's called the Real Estate Management Development Program.
And we're working with Royal Roads and with VIU, hoping to get them to recognize it as one of their micro credentials.
We also have an educational series that would be interesting to all of you.
And we call it Understanding Development Realities Series.
And it's done quarterly.
It's a presentation.
It's about an hour and a half long.
And it is virtual, so online, and and it is we're invites are sent out to all the elected officials and staff for the municipalities on Vancouver Island.
And we choose topics that are are we find that would be educational for for you.
And our first one was on performance, and our second one was on parking, and we'll be doing another one in the fall.
So look for your email you'll be receiving and it's free.
And so we just encourage everybody to attend those.
This is our events, and it's a presentation and networking for our for our members.
We have social events, we have a golf tournament, we have a summer social, a Christmas social, our summer social, and our Christmas social.
We uh donate our net revenue to a charity that is chosen by our members.
And we do uh development tours as well.
So we do local ones for our members here, as well as out of town tours that we've done kind of all over North America.
Um, and we just uh go and and look at what other people are doing in other areas of of the world or well in North America just to see their challenges, their successes, and how we can learn from them.
We do extensive policy work, um, and this is where we look at informed changes across all levels of government.
So we try to align or help to align the uh policies that are being brought forward by the federal government, the provincial government and the municipal government and to kind of help them align so that they don't collide with each other.
So we're working with the province and the Fed mainly the province on BC building code changes, the step code in zero carbon, BC Transit, BC Hydro, a variety of different policies that we're working with them on.
The municipalities, we have what is called a liaison committee, and we have it with Victoria Squaimo Caulward.
We're working with SUC to get it up and running with them.
And I've also talked to Leanne Taylor here at View Royal, and she's interested.
And basically, what it is is it's UDI representatives get together with the directors of the development or the departments that work directly with development, and we exchange information and we help the municipalities out by creating working groups that can inform and help make decisions for your policies.
We do community outreach to help members community organizations like daycares and so on with small jobs that they need done.
And we have uh extensive research and analysis that we are provided by a couple of our members, uh, new research, which uh provides us uh quarterly stats and realm island realm uh that gives us uh real estate stats.
So UDI is not a lobbying group.
We pre we pride ourselves on working collaboratively with all levels of government by sharing information and working together to achieve the goal of uh creating sustainable vibrant communities.
So thank you very much for listening to me tonight.
Thank you.
Thank you for taking the time.
Anybody else else in the room wish to address council?
Seeing nobody.
Let's uh Carl, let's go to the phone.
Is there anybody online that will wishes to address council?
Mayor Tobias, we still have no callers this evening.
Um okay.
Carl, we got to do a better job.
I think in that case, we can close public participation period, and I'll turn the chair over to Councillor Kwowitz for Parks and Rec.
Thank you, worship.
I wanted to give a brief chair's report on the uh parks and recreation portfolio.
Uh safe to say we had a very successful summer uh here in View Royal with uh various uh girls' softball tournaments in particular, including the provincials, and it was a huge success.
Um, compliments to staff of the town of View Royal uh and uh all their support they provided with that.
I also serve as chair of the board of directors for the West Shore Parks and Recreations Society.
We have our first meeting after our summer break tomorrow.
And I just thought I'd give a quick uh update there.
We have our preliminary uh 2024 budget presentation happening, but perhaps more importantly, and uh probably of high public interest is we have a uh pickleball consultant presentation uh that has many people in Greater Victoria have been anxiously awaiting.
And it's quite a comprehensive report done uh by a consulting firm.
And uh it's we partnered in concert with the Victoria Regional Pickleball Association to pay for that uh report.
Uh, it's available on the West Shore Parks and Rec website.
We'll be uh diving into it uh in detail tomorrow.
It's an open meeting if anyone's interested, uh looking at ways to uh build pickleball courts on the West Shore Parks and Recreation Land uh and exploring that.
Uh as uh as a board of directors member and as the chair, I can tell you there is a lot of interest.
Uh there's a lot of momentum right now.
Uh people are really um really excited.
So uh lots of things to come there.
Uh and if if anyone uh on council has any questions, please feel free to ask me now or we can follow up next next meeting.
Poor old Port Hardy.
Um they have a couple of tennis courts, and what they've done is basically marked them off for both tennis and pickleball.
So another way you might want to save money and just double up on the type of courts.
Certainly uh that's that's something that does happen in some communities.
Um if you recall, we've also uh we are in negotiations with a company out of Ontario to uh build a cover over the existing tennis courts at the West Shore Parks and Recreation uh tennis court area.
And so that that's moving forward as well, in a sense, uh in an exploratory fashion right now.
Um, there's also potential revenue stream from both uh tennis court rentals during the winter that would they'd be covered, and of course, pickleball courts would uh generate revenue as well.
John, the report, uh the pickleball report.
Is that um you see it's on the West Shore website?
Is it part of um the uh board of directors um package?
It's part of the board of directors package, and uh um as far as I know it should be on the agenda.
I can get you a copy, certainly.
Uh my understanding is it should be uh it it'll be public.
It's it's nothing in camera.
This is this is uh there's a lot of people attending the initial meeting uh lobbying for it.
Okay, thank you.
Councilor Brown.
Thank you.
I hate to flog a dead horse, but I'm still walking by almost every day, except when I'm out of town.
The two unused tennis courts at Royal Roads, that would make total sense if a partnership could be made to uh restore those.
Uh two of them that could make four pickleball courts and uh like it's already fenced off.
Uh the the asphalt needs some work, but uh I know you've addressed it before, Damien, but it'd be nice if it was perhaps revisited as a possibility.
Certainly uh we um we explored that with uh the CAO of Of West Hore Parks and Recreation.
Uh there were some uh issues that prevented us from moving forward with that.
I know the president of Royal Roads, Philip Steenkamp, uh quite a progressive individual and would likely be open to that.
Certainly any elected official in the CRD could uh begin dialogue with uh with the president should they feel uh fit.
Council Brown, yes.
On mute.
You're on mute, Councilor Brown.
Whoops.
The uh the Justice Institute has moved up some of their training programs there, and it'd be nice for them to be able to use the facility that facility uh during their downtime.
So yeah, again, just another possibility.
Certainly lots of options out there for recreation on the West Shore.
I agree, growing population, and uh there's so many uh accomplished uh counselors in the city of Callwood uh that hopefully can uh maybe um get that moving with your uh prodding.
Thank you.
I think that moves to councillor McKenzie for environment.
Yes, thank you.
I'd like to call the environment committee to order.
Uh I'll have a quick chair's report.
I am happy to highlight that at our last council meeting, we gave first, second, and third reading to the building bylaw.
And what that did in a number of things, but the thing I want to highlight is that it incorporated changes to the progress of our timelines for complying with the zero carbon step code.
So now we align with Sanich and Victoria.
And there is a number of ways you can recycle, but one of them is there is a bottle drive happening at View Royal Elementary on the 16th.
So if you have bottles, uh feel free to bring them there.
So that's all from my report.
I do also have a new business item, which is called Adopt a Tree Program.
So actually, maybe I should stop to ask if there's any questions on my chair's report first.
Oh, okay.
So the Adopt a Tree program, this motion stems from a conversation I had with the View Royal Climate Coalition, and their concern for the trees that they've seen in the town where maybe due to the drought, they have not survived the ones that we've planted.
And we were thinking of some ideas that perhaps we could launch this program that people, residents or a school, et cetera, could opt to adopt a tree to care for it, to water it, to make sure that they thrive.
Um, noting that staff you know capacity is limited, and so this would really help out in in that regard.
So I had proposed that we refer this and the details of the program to PREAC.
However, staff has recommended that we refer it to them first because uh they are reviewing um an upcoming urban forest strategy report, and therefore it might be more appropriate to go there.
But I would hope that PREAC also has uh an opportunity to feed in on this.
Are you making that a motion?
So it is a motion, yes.
I would like to raise a motion that we refer uh the adopt a tree program to staff for review in part of as part of the urban forest strategy report.
If I could have a secondary, yeah.
Okay, seconded by Councillor Mattson.
Um any questions, discussion?
Comment.
I just wanted to compliment staff on the number of water bags I've seen around the community.
There's seems to have been a huge increase, and so thank you.
And I guess one other comment is that um once that we've the urban forest strategy report, the draft, uh, that that could also be referred to the parks and recreation with that focus and other aspects.
Okay, any other questions?
No.
Okay, so I'll I'll call a vote.
All those in favor.
Okay, all uh and none opposed.
So that passes.
Thank you very much.
And I will now pass it over to Councillor Masson, uh, for the Planning, Development and Engagement Committee.
Thank you.
I do not have a chair's report.
I'm sure tonight's planning development engagement meetings gonna go on for a while.
Um so that takes us to staff report um for rezoning for uh 339, 341, and 345 Island Highway.
So for my colleagues, just to remind you, we sort of break this down into two sections.
One of them, staff does a report, we ask staff questions, then we make a motion.
So there was a bit of confusion last time, and I got to ignore my colleague here because I just kept looking over at my over here.
So when it comes to the questions, I will probably go from my right to left so that I ensure that everyone has an opportunity to speak and I don't miss anybody.
And again, for uh those I ignored last time, you have my apologies.
Just uh going to wait.
Jeff, could you vote the presentation?
Great.
Thank you.
Uh so Sterling Scory, community planner presenting a reunion zoning application for three three nine, three four one, three four five Island Highway.
Some background on the site outlined in red.
Former site for the Cambridge Motel currently functions as a below market rental housing in the community.
It's located on the periphery of the neighbor harbor neighborhood.
The current land use designation is mixed residential, and the current zone is C5 Tourist Commercial.
The applicant came back to the committee at a petition and delegation, and from there, staff have now worked with the applicant to see this application in front of the committee tonight.
So we're going to go through some project information, just some background in terms of what the application covers.
So the proposed comprehensive development zone as proposed by the applicant would see a floor space ratio of 1.6 to 1, a lot coverage of 29%, building height of 19.2 meters at the maximum, or six six stories, a front yard setback, and for the purposes of conversation and zoning interpretation, the front yard is Prince Robert Drive, the side yard is Heddle Park, the rear yard of Fire Hall, and the flanking yard Island Highway.
So we see increases to the setback for the front yard, the side yard and the flanking yard.
There is a decrease to the rear yard from uh this is all from the perspective of the existing uh existing zone for what you could build.
For uh overview of parking, applicants proposing to b uh uh include 297 parking stalls within the development.
Um this uh meets the requirement for parking for the studio one bedroom, two bedroom, three bedroom units.
Uh, a few things to be determined, uh which would come at a later date, would be uh any type of uh small car parking uh which is permitted in the zoning bylaw, and the applicant could uh provide up to 90 uh spaces.
Um other note is the uh requirement for electric vehicle parking and uh accessible parking.
Um there's none shown at this time, but we haven't really got into the uh uh super fine details uh at this point for the uh the rezoning application.
Uh the application would also require that all bicycle parking stalls, which the applicant has provided 238, which is uh in compliance with the zoning bylaw, is that all of those would have to be uh electrified.
With respect to the unit overview, uh, this has changed since the uh original application, uh, a decrease in the amount of units.
So uh still one bedroom, two bedroom, three-bedroom, and studio apartments, the majority of which uh are one bed uh two-bedroom, so about uh 95 uh percent.
And there is an indoor amenity space uh provided uh in one of the buildings on the ground floor.
Uh just a note on this the number of uh units, uh their sizes, this would be subject to uh uh change uh moving forward.
Uh this wouldn't be finalized until a building permit uh issuance.
Uh so the next slides are just some uh conceptual design drawings for the uh for the application.
The image on the left-hand side of the screen shows the building from the intersection of Prince Robert Drive and Island Highway.
The image on the right shows perspective of the buildings from Island Highway in the approximate location of Burnett Road or the corner of the fire hall site.
A couple of things to note that are major differences from the original application to this application is the significant retention of trees on site and the lack of any surface parking.
So the applicant has proposed that all parking will be located underground and access will be via the side off the Prince Robert Drive, so a single vehicle access point.
What was different between this application and the prior application is a significant increase in tree preserve preservation in the southeast corner.
We'll detail that more later in this presentation.
A amenity space, outdoor uh play structure, barbecue area, and uh they've expanded the outdoor green space and trail area, and they have proposed a uh a public uh dog park as well.
So just building off what I just said, and in terms of the underground parking, uh all parking located underground, uh including the bicycle uh parking access is uh provided off of uh Prince Robert Drive.
And uh a side uh cross section of the building showing the uh the relative heights, so two levels of uh underground parking, and uh the buildings are stepped back from uh Island Highway to uh decrease the kind of uh mass and and uh sizing of the building in relation to the the street, and then uh their maximum height is up to 19.2 meters, uh roughly uh six stories in height.
And then a couple slides on just the uh the mock-ups, conceptual designs of the buildings from uh the first image there, uh flanking yard uh from Island Highway, the image below uh Heddle Park.
So this would be the uh the side yard.
And then the image on the top uh left-hand corner is the uh view from Prince Robert Drive, which is technically the the front yard of the building, and then the uh last image there is from the fire hall.
So, with respect to uh rezoning applications, staff have done a review uh multiple parts.
Uh some major components of this include official uh community plan review, uh zoning bylaw review, uh uh land use concerns or challenges, and then other uh other items we'll we'll get to in a moment.
So, with respect to the official community plan, um, the development site is not located within an identified neighborhood center or community center in the official community plan.
The lands are designated mixed residential, which supports either uh what are two.
So the the first option is uh small lot detached houses, townhouses, uh low rise apartments up to three stories, and a maximum of 1.25 to one uh floor space ratio, or uh up to four stories uh for apartment and a maximum FSR of 1.6 to 1.
Um the applicant has opted to pursue option two, so apartments, for a maximum floor space ratio of 1.6, and it does meet the intended density and land use for this mixed residential land use designation.
With respect to policies, staff prepared a multi page policy overview of how this application meets some policies within the OCP as an overview of some of those policies.
These are shown on screen here.
The application provides a diversity of housing forms within the community, rental housing, supports walking, cycling, and transit.
It's in close proximity to some transportation infrastructure in the community, including the E Trail and the Galloping Goose.
It uh is uh street oriented, the buildings, uh, and the applicant has worked with staff to provide a uh uh tenant uh tenant assistance plan, and the applicant has uh taken great uh efforts to revise their proposal to see uh a larger number of trees on the site retained from the previous application.
With respect to the zoning bylaw, the intent of a comprehensive development zone is to provide a zone uh that is specific to a uh property or parcel that would not work otherwise with the with the existing zones of a of a zoning bylaw.
So for this reason and the proposal that's uh at hand, there's no other zone within the zoning bylaw that would work with what they're proposing to do.
Uh so a new comprehensive development zone would be created to regulate uh height, setbacks, density, and other uh site specific uh requirements or your uses.
Um variance uh to the height is required.
Um so may have noticed that the the height of the building is six stories, the uh the proposed or the height of the building is six stories, and the maximum permitted in the OCP is four.
So variance would be required uh and all future variances, including the height of the building would be handled at development permit stage.
Should this application uh be successful in getting rezoned.
Going into potential land use impacts, the applicant provided a transportation uh impact assessment from that uh report.
Uh the consultant provided uh five different uh recommendations summarized here on the screen.
Uh so the first is an upgrade to the intersection at Prince Robert Drive and Island Highway would see a signalized intersection.
This would be paid for by the applicant.
Uh installation of westbound turn lane on island highway, uh, installation of sidewalk uh landscape boulevards, which would be in compliance with the subdivision and development uh bylaw, so this is respect to frontage.
Uh upgrade to existing bus stop, and then finally, uh a point that uh warrants a bit more uh further conversation is a a two-way left turn lane that would extend from Prince Robert Drive to Burnett Road.
If this was done, it would just require capital works be uh used, but some more conversation, like I said, on whether that's pursued or not.
With respect to all on site parking, uh, as I discussed further or previously, this would be discussed further at the development permit stage in terms of any type of variances that would be required or to determine what regulations are met.
However, uh, in review of the the site design and site access, the fire department has to expressed some concern with a single vehicle uh access with no um with no kind of predominant fire access onto the site for their aerial ladder truck.
So staff will be working further with the applicant to identify a uh a fire access onto the uh onto the site.
It is a requirement to to move forward with the uh with the application.
Um environmental impacts, there's no uh environmental development permit area, however, there's a large uh green space on the site, and uh there are uh is mentioned of invasive species, so staff would recommend that as a condition of rezoning that uh these species be removed.
The species uh in in question are uh things like the English ivy, which are predominant within the uh the green space uh proposed trail area.
Removing those species would wouldn't uh ensure that though that trail area could uh be used as intended.
Uh getting into tree impacts, uh there's a total of 125 uh on-site trees.
The applicant is uh proposing that 43 of those trees be removed, all of which are bylaw protected.
Uh the tree replacement uh ratio is two two to one as uh required in the tree protection bylaw.
Um this would be determined uh later uh via the development permit stage uh and would be a requirement to have uh uh development or a tree permit prior to billing permit.
Um, and an arborist would have to remain on site.
The arborist report that has been provided does detail uh retention uh methods and mitigation uh methods that would be uh carried out to ensure that the the trees uh identified as being preserved would be uh would remain so.
Uh service requirements.
Um the uh conceptual plans that have been provided so far uh indicate that there may be a sewer uh upgrade that needs to take place on Island Highway.
Um, and road widening of Prince Robert Drive would be done uh via cost share to ensure that the existing uh road right away would be remain uh within the town.
Um the on-site and outdoor amenities.
Uh the applicant has provide proposed a on-site trail and green space, uh children's play area and a barbecue area.
Uh, with respect to the barbecue area, staff are uh in discussions with the applicant to move the barbecue area closer to the proposed children's play area and amenity area as that had been previously discussed as being a bit of a natural buffer to Heddle Park.
And the second point regarding the dog public dog park staff are not supportive of having a public dog park on private property.
This has raises uh challenges with uh maintenance access for public through private property and um doesn't really um uh may not function as an as in and as intended.
So there may be more challenges with having a public park on private property uh and also just given the location at the rear of the property it's it's not very accessible by members of the public.
There was previous discussions too about having a trail connection from Hedel Park to the property.
And for similar reasons, staff don't support this just because of the public and private interface between those two properties.
Staff are going to discuss further with the applicant to uh register uh protections for those uh those spaces uh likely through a covenant um to ensure that those green spaces are preserved for the uh for the remainder of the use of the site and that they operate as intended.
We'll discuss further uh prior to consideration of first reading should the uh the application move forward.
For uh this site foundation underpinning.
Uh, there's a possibility that due to the location of the uh the parking garage that the applicant would have to do some underpinning uh for the foundation.
Um staff just want to be clear that any type of uh foundation works or underpinning would have to be agreed upon by those respective neighbors.
And if it was pursued via the uh town's land, uh we would do a license to occupy.
Um the affected land was within the road right away on Island Highway, they would also have to get uh CRD approval as there's a large water main uh on Highland Highway that uh may be affected.
Uh so we'd want uh CRD's approval for that.
I'll back up a little bit and do a bit of a background.
Part four amenity contributions.
So the applicant did provide a landlift analysis as part of the original application.
Part of that landlift analysis was to determine if there was a lift in value for the for the site.
This is as per our community amenity contribution policy.
But council can still negotiate amenities through that policy.
So staff have requested that applicant the applicant consider providing below market and accessible housing units.
However, the the applicant has expressed concern with the affordability challenge and the cost of the application or the cost of the development.
So the benefit of providing the OC or the affordable rental dwellings is that it is consistent with the OCP and addresses the community's concern via the OCP of rising housing costs, construction costs.
Staff will continue to work with the applicant prior to consideration of first reading to understand what what can be done with respect to uh provision of uh affordable housing and just just uh as a note on uh the tenant assistance plan um the proposal is uh grandfathered however the applicant has gone beyond what was recommended in the the tenant assistance plan for uh monetary uh values for relocation and and payment um they've uh they've increased the the uh the trigger point for how long a person is eligible to receive uh uh receive a payment and uh is is uh in all and all our other tense purposes is consistent with the the policy despite not uh having to be uh consistent as it is grandfathered um this is an overview that was provided by the uh the applicant with respect to public engagement.
So they have done uh they've had four meetings since the application uh was uh initiated in April of 2022 and just some uh comments on the bottom there that were received from the public uh at these events um shared with the applicant as uh either concerns or challenges for this for the sites um there was uh additional uh feedback provided via uh uh email circulation this afternoon uh that's been attached to the agenda as well and just wrapping up so sustainability climate change impacts uh so impacts to the on-site trees would be 43 uh trees removed.
However, staff feel that long term uh there would be recovery of the urban forest via new landscaping uh at this time, we don't have a landscape plan uh that would be confirmed via uh development permit process.
And the proposal would have to meet the step two British Columbia Energy Step Code.
Financial implications would be that should this application move forward, town would be responsible for maintaining a new signalized intersection, sidewalks, boulevard, new trees in the right-of-way, and what once it's installed by the applicant at their expense.
So wrapping up, next next steps for staff would be should this go forward to first and second reading, would be to confirm the fire truck uh access to the site.
Um, as the fire department said, that's pivotal in having this application move forward.
Uh, revised location of the outdoor amenity spaces, uh, dog park and uh barbecue area.
Uh further clarifications and revisions to the architectural uh architectural drawings.
Um speak further with the applicant uh and potentially enhancing the the building's design uh and sighting prior to uh uh conformance with the OCP form and character guidelines, and then finally uh review and discuss uh discuss other opportunities for the community amenity contributions.
Staff do have a recommendation recommendation for the committee, which is that the report dated to August 29th, 2023 from the community planner titled Rezoning Application 2023 01 for 339, 341, and 345 Island Highway be received for information.
Thank you.
So thank you for a very thorough report and presentation.
Much appreciated.
And now comes the fun part for you.
We will start from my right and go on towards dawn questions for staff on the report.
This is just questions from staff, not a tirade on what you like or don't like.
So thanks.
Thank you.
I have two questions.
The first is about um one of the early slides, you mentioned that this would be the creation of a new zone and I was curious whether this is uh something that happens frequently or would this be quite exceptional in doing that through the chair uh it really depends on what is being proposed um there have been other zones that I can think of off the top of my head that have required development or comprehensive developments uh zones as well um the trigger for uh a comprehensive comprehensive development zone is whether it's consistent with the both the OCP and and the the zoning bylaw um kind of hard to say I I don't rarely remember all the all the zones that have been uh created via this process but I do believe that uh uh the town has in their zoning bylaw uh about 28 comprehensive development zones.
Some municipalities have hundreds.
Okay, great.
Thank you.
And my second question is about um staff's concerns with the dog park and the path to the Heddle Trail.
I was curious whether if it was stated that that would be for the residents only, so it would be private, would there still be concerns with the with both of those?
Through the chair, it was never it was strictly stated on the plans as being a public dog park.
I don't want to speak entirely for staff.
Ivan might have some uh weigh in on this, but I think there were warrants further discussion with the applicant to see if there's opportunity to have some type of subtype of dog uh area on on the park, uh so long as it's not uh not private, it's not intended to be a uh or not public as it is it's intended to be used for the residents.
It could be potentially like a uh uh an addition to the uh amenities on on the site.
And sorry, and the uh same goes for the trail, the connection, because that was the one that I I thought was interesting because lots of stratus connect onto public uh paths, you know, portage park, et cetera.
So whether that would be an issue.
Yes, staff have concerns with uh connecting the Heddle Park Trail to the on-site trail.
Um for the excuse me, for the reasons that I stated earlier earlier, excuse me, about the uh the public dog park, um, it becomes a a maintenance issue and access issue where there's a large private uh or a large public park on private land.
Um the other issue just becomes uh ownership.
Um, and Ivan might be able to speak to that in terms of whether the town is in a position to take over a large you know, additional park space on private land.
Thank you, Sterling.
So um and to the chair.
Whenever it comes to parks access to our trails, it's um council has always had the ability to to make a call.
Council may recall on another development that had access on Deportage Park that um one of the accesses was denied, but they actually did allow an access uh on the rear end of the development site.
So um with the information at hand, that was reasonable because there was uh the deletion of one of the accesses um pretty much uh inhibited any maintenance issues that would result.
Um for example, the need to reinstate the grass or to uh keep the path neat and tidy, uh pretending slips, trips, and falls.
Uh so that particular case uh the council accepted and approved uh an access in the rear end.
Um staff did not have enough information in this particular uh drawing and this these particular uh um deliverables to really make a call.
Uh should the path access be limited only to private use.
And for example, if there may be, for example, a gate something to prevent public from going in, um, if it is situated in a manner that uh doesn't encourage uh disposal of um garden waste, which staff have seen on an ongoing basis, uh, then staff could be in support of an access.
Yeah.
Um thank you through the chair.
I just wanted to sort of uh build on that response as well, as there is this desire to have um a natural buffer along the uh that um the south um boundary as well, so keep that in its natural state.
Um so that's just something to also contemplate when we're considering um adding access because that may result in loss of more trees, depending on what that access looks like and the alignment and things like that to ensure it's accessible.
Because that's one thing that we do need to make sure is these pathways are accessible as well.
And John, if you could limit your questions to two questions, and then when we'll get through everyone else, we can come back to you if you have more.
Yes, thank you.
So um uh one of the uh issues that have been a great concern to the harbor area, you know, it's really great that we've got a uh a light uh at Prince Robert, but uh there are 300 cars um approximately that would be um in and off of this site, and um it's not unusual for people to use um V Roll Avenue, Prince Robert Drive, and so forth um as a shortcut when things get really super congested and annoying on the island highway, such as the last few days.
We've been having considerable congestion.
So with the those 300 cars and with the kind of uh congestion that you would see on the island highway in the morning, what would be staff's uh thoughts and traffic calming deterrent options to ensure, that these new residents would not be going on narrow roads, steep roads, difficult roads, uh, that would uh pose a challenge and maybe a safety risk to the residents in harbor.
Uh through the chair, I think we'll have to get back to the committee about potential options for uh for potential traffic coming.
Um I'm not a uh I'm not a transportation engineer, so I would have to uh defer.
Oh, I see a light.
Uh yeah, I can just build on that.
Um the data shows in the traffic impact assessment that the amount of traffic actually coming from the development and going on to the intersection is uh not entirely significant.
Um there is a lot of units, but when it comes to peak usage, it is uh the queues are not a backed up as if every single car is leaving at the same time.
But that said, um, when it comes to traffic backup in and around the island highway area, uh, the challenge of shortcutting is region wide.
Uh like not just Burrow, there's a lot of other municipalities that do um see these issues.
But that with the Prince Robert Drive being fairly steep, um that in itself almost creates a traffic calming, uh, just simply because it does act as a deterrent given the narrowness and the and kind of the nature of the approach to the to Prince Robert Drive uh does create that kind of traffic calming nature.
When it comes to detail designs, uh staff can certainly work with the developer to keep that uh nature and to um find ways to make sure that traffic stays on Island Highway.
Yeah, thank you.
Um I I would really look to uh seeing some concrete um options because the um I I quite frankly disagree that um Prince Arbor Drive is a traffic-coming thing.
It's a hazard.
There is no sidewalks, it's a real uh people extremely nervous with the traffic that exists today.
And if they're gonna rat run all the way to V Will Avenue, which is even worse, you know, that steep hill with with uh no sight lines and so forth, I think um it would be quite hazardous.
And I in terms of public safety and so forth, I think uh we're gonna really need to think of if this development is approved, that um we're gonna be spending some money to resolve that.
And my second question is to can staff tell me um what the uh DCC amounts that would come from this.
The community amenity funds would is it uh four thousand dollars per unit.
The through the chair uh the DCCs um I I have not done that calculation.
Um that would be done at uh at building permit stage and it's it's based on uh a calculation that'll come later.
I I can't do that uh can't do that math in my head either uh largely because I don't know the uh when it comes to council.
And I'm just asking you fly at 10,000 feet.
I don't I don't know want to go down to t dollars and a cents.
But yeah, it would be really nice.
I mean and and I'm sure the applicant can probably help you um yeah because they've they've been in the business long enough and they've done some projects in B Row, and they probably can extrapolate and help guide on what the DCCs, the CACs, and perhaps even what the proposed taxes increase might be from uh this site to uh the uh full um blowout or development of this location.
And I look forward to coming around again for more questions.
Sid.
Thank you.
Uh yeah, I had two questions.
One is you had indicated in your staff report that the sewer main may need replacing.
How far down the road does the sewer main need replacing, Ivan?
Thank you, Chair.
So the sewer main is directly in front of the frontage.
There's only one small section that was identified under a sanitary master plan.
And the reason why it says may is because uh we would be working with the applicant's engineer to prove that out.
Thank you.
My uh next question was um do we have an impact on Old Island Highway with a light, another light going on Old Island Highway?
Not talking about local, but what's what's your commute time going to be affected by another light?
Ivan through the chair, I don't have the information on hand right now, but the traffic impact assessment does uh stipulate queues and uh queue times and queue lengths uh during peak times, which is probably the time where uh the neighborhood would be most affected uh during rush hour.
But that said, not to put not to put myself in the position where I may have to correct myself.
Uh, I do think that based on the traffic impact assessment for recall, there was um the commute time increase was going to be almost negligible in terms of the entire trip.
It wants to go all the way around all the way through the island highway.
But that said, um, I would have to check traffic impact assessment itself to to double check that and work with the applicant's engineer to confirm.
Thank you, Jerry.
Thank you.
Thank you, Sterling.
Um, you said that this proposal is consistent with the OCP.
Is that with the OCP that we're working with or the revised draft OCP that we're not working with?
Through the chair, it is consistent with the 2011 OCP uh designation.
Correct.
Good.
Okay.
Is there is there visitor parking in those among those 300 parking spots?
Through the chair, there has been no visitor parking identified.
Um at this time.
Uh the um requirement in the zoning bylaw is that there is no visitor parking uh required.
Uh so that would be at the discretion of uh further conversations with with the applicant.
Um but it's it's not a requirement in the in the zoning bylaw.
Okay.
And I have a I have a half question, Ron.
Um, and it's kind of a comment, but I'll put a question mark to it.
And that is why are we seeing this now when fire trucks can't access it?
This was the uh review process for staff.
So staff received this application uh in full approximately the August uh 5th.
It was sent out for referral.
Fire provided referral comments along with external agencies and other internal departments, and staff provided a report uh for this committee to hold meeting.
Um staff in internal discussions uh determined that there is opportunity to work with the applicant uh with the existing site to broad fire fire access and uh to uh move forward with the uh the uh the application okay thank you thank you so you noted in your report that the proposal from the applicant is requesting six stories and is the current OCP stipulate four uh and if so, I assume that's a variance that will be requested in the future.
Through the chair, yes.
Uh if the uh if this per uh if this rezoning goes forward, it would be a variance uh at time of uh development permit and would be subject to uh council approval.
The uh development permit would be for a uh uh mixed residential form and character uh uh permit application.
Don, you still awake over there?
Yeah, yeah, believe it or not.
Uh 1 a.m.
Um yes, thanks, Sterling.
Um I'll try to limit myself.
I have quite a few comments, but I won't go there.
Um little dis I am disappointed that Hadel Trail has been um ruled out by staff.
Uh there's a trail there already, and it uh to me it'd be a great amenity to have not only for the new occupants, but for the neighbors.
Um I don't think it'd be very long.
Yeah, you'd probably have to get rid of some um uh trees and not the most uh healthy trees anyway but um I think that should be uh looked at again I do like some of the changes I think that it it's getting better um and any more underground parking they have creates more surface space for outdoor space for the for the tenants and that's uh that's great and last point is I hate it when people say well we don't know what affordable is where I don't even think we're asking for affordable I think we're asking for below market rentals a certain percentage and I'll leave it at that very good questions starting and I'm good no question lots of comments so two more questions for you John yeah so um you talked about a covenant uh for green space and but I it wasn't clear to me on a map what areas you're actually asking for a covenant to to be applied through the uh through the chair staff have not uh confirmed uh the covenant area uh with this application uh for this application with the applicant at this time.
I can uh provide an overview of the area in question though.
So the area in question is largely around this uh this uh trail and uh green space area and in the the buffer area uh adjacent to Heddel Park.
So I can't really control this uh this uh pointer very well, but the uh the green space would be uh running adjacent to Heddle Park.
The intent of having a covenant area for the the large green space would be to uh protect it from future development opportunity um and and protect that space as a as a continued green space and trail area for the future.
Okay.
So my uh question to staff um it would be helpful to see other examples in Viewwood where we have asked applicants to provide covenant um on on lands.
Um I one comes to mind is uh Gibraltar Bay which is right next door we have a covenant on the uh the waterfront um for public access to the uh gazebo and as well in the center a trade area so I know that there was those two, but uh I'm sure there's been all sorts of examples of covenants, and that would be helpful to put this into context.
Similarly, it would also be helpful for staff um and I'm to give some examples where we have lots of examples of six-story buildings going on where we have uh we have we don't allow it in the OCP.
We've you know it's always been a variance, but I think we've got lots of uh examples where C six story buildings have have occurred, particularly uh being stepped back.
So uh that would be uh useful to uh for staff to point out and allow us to see how it fits in context with other developments that have been uh considered in the past.
Um and uh let me let me um also speak to the point um about um if this project goes ahead and we have tenants living there.
Um I uh staff's made the example already.
The pub, their access from like uh we have in the portage park uh six story um development and they were granted an access to portage park we've also got um in eagle creek um village um where they have uh those tenants those people living there they have access uh into a park area so parks trails public parks public trails as long as there's a gate as long as there's private um you know I think it's uh I wouldn't say why we would not approve it because we are giving these these uh potential residents quick, wonderful access into an amazing neighborhood where they can get down to the beach, get down to our play area, Newstead Park.
So let's open it up and make sure that this is not a walled community.
I can appreciate that we don't want public going in, but their access into the community is worthwhile.
And my question is, why don't we let them?
You're missing that, Don.
Sid questions?
Jerry, any more?
Damien, anymore?
Don?
I always have a question.
I always have a question.
Uh just a question.
I'm I'm not sure the procedure.
If the owner somewhere down the road wanted to convert all the properties to uh to caught the condos for for purchase, what what would he have to do?
Would you have to come back for rezoning or how would that work?
I'll defer to staff.
Uh so through the chair, no, it wouldn't uh trigger rezoning.
Um the applicant could uh just yeah go ahead and stratify.
And generally speaking, um even what with rental buildings, they're often stratified, even though they're rental, they're still stratified.
Um and there are ways that a municipality can um ensure that they're remain as rental for a certain term uh through a housing agreement.
Um that's just to secure the rental for a certain given for a certain time frame, and that is something that um the committee can consider.
And it's just a concern it's just a concern of mine that uh um yeah, I mean yeah it is a concern of mine because we do need the rental properties but uh turning it over to uh to condos i don't know i i don't like that and and just one last comment too high too many units that's it that that's coming up from your opportunity to comment question one more question just after if i may um so if i recall in the report um you were recommending that the larger the two buildings um be moved closer to the street um and i i don't know where that um you're you're asking for, but um uh i think our hopes were the that the buildings could be pulled away from the street, not closer to.
Can you show me where the staff are recommending that?
Uh that is just consistent with the official community plan guidelines uh with respect to street orientation, and it follows uh general good planning practice to have buildings that are orientated to the street and closer to the street to be ground orientated.
Through the chair.
It was just a recommendation, it was not a uh requirement.
Thank you.
Sorry, which buildings are you referring to then?
If you can you show me on your little pointer in that drawing there.
Staff were recommending that this building could come forward.
And that more green space in the back could be retained.
And this uh amenity space could be enhanced further.
Thank you.
Okay, so now comes the fun part.
Well so we'll need a motion, either a positive or a negative motion on whether or not to proceed to first reading.
I move receipt.
Second.
To receive.
All right, we still need to advise whether or not we want to proceed.
So well, let's do let's deal with the uh the question at hand because that's the staff's recommendations to move receipt.
That's fine.
We'll receive motion, receive the report.
Okay, everyone's fine with receiving report.
All in favor against carried.
Now comes the motion on whether or not we should go to first reading or not.
Does someone have a motion?
Well, you see, I we're not ready yet.
I think the staff have um maybe staff can help us.
Are we ready to go to first second reading yet?
Uh so through the chair, um, there are several items that um that need to be sorted out with the applicants.
So staff will be bringing this back to council with um some updated information for council's consideration.
All right.
Just uh just to advise there are you know, there are issues, and so um it'll be entertaining to have that discussion for a long.
But I have a a a long number of comments in terms of what I have problems with this project.
And the question is, do we want to comment now on whether we what we like or don't like?
Leanne?
Uh so through the chair, the the reason for staff to bring this report forward today is to receive feedback from council uh uh for consideration as we sort out um aspects of this application.
Okay, so then since we won't have a motion on whether or not to proceed to first reading, but we will go from right to left for people to explain their concerns and the things they like.
Thank you.
So we will start with Allison.
I actually don't have many concerns at all with this development.
I see a lot of benefits.
I won't go into them now because that's not the purpose of this.
But um the only thing I would comment on is uh what Councilor Rogers was just asking about the positioning of that the building.
Personally, my concern is the noise potentially from the highway.
So anything that we can do to mitigate that, and so I think keeping it where it is would be um good, and also the number of trees that are on the diagrams, I would like to I don't know if those are guaranteed staff.
I don't are those guaranteed with the the smaller trees on the front or is that just a um through the chair I I believe that those trees are would be new trees.
Right, yeah.
But they are they're guaranteed to as part of the development like they would have to be planted.
As uh um Sterling noted earlier, we haven't received a landscape plan and that would all that information would be um included in the landscape plan um at the time of development permit, but the applicant's intent is to enhance the tree canopy along island highway.
So I think we will see substantial trees, tree planting along there.
Okay.
Great.
Yeah.
Those are my comments.
Thank you.
Okay.
So so we're just going around once, John, so get it all out.
Similar to uh Council McKenzie, I don't have a lot of concerns about um the proposal.
We have um uh I think the the uh the density the site coverage is is remarkable only 30 percent um we have uh uh an extraordinary amount of uh green space that's uh that's made available um uh to um to protect uh the a significant forest uh treed area um I think the the ambience um within this the um this community will be uh quite significant and um I think it you know such an attractive um compelling um benefit I think because it uh is staff have reported um it's on a bus route it's walkable easily to to um view all elementary the ENN trail is there um I think there's enough to be said and there is also some potential for other market locations be it at um Island Highway v Helmican or even at um Atkins um area that is walkable this is probably going to be um uh really quite a walkable area.
So um as long as we staff can address the um for the lack of better term, rat running in the harbor community and addressing the safety issues of speeding vehicles and the number of vehicles and the ambitious, you just gotta appreciate the number of dog walkers we have in the community.
Um as long as staff have come back with the recommendations on how we can sort that out.
Um in terms of an amenity package, um, I would still hope that um um we have the amenity package, but you know, we've seen other um applicants come forward with other offers.
Well, that we would be interesting, like complete the sidewalk on Jadberg.
Just the thought.
Anyway, um, I'm looking forward to uh hearing from the public.
I think we should move quickly to first and second reading.
Time to hear from the public.
It may not even get there, John, but don't worry.
Thanks, Ron.
Sid.
Um I think we started off with some commercial, and it came in initially as a as a town center, which it's not.
It's a dense apartment complex, which we have many if you go to or skin lane or aspire.
Um, really concerned the fact that it's too high and too dense.
And I I think counselor Rogers looking to staff in order to alleviate rat running.
And I think if we approve this, we're gonna get it in spades.
I think there's just too many people, and and people take the path of least resistance.
Um I I would argue that it will have a noticeable impact on traffic and transit going through Old Island Highway.
Callwood has come out with a statement to say they would do nothing to impede the traffic flow on Old Island Highway, and we're just adding to it by not only adding a very large uh development rate on it, but adding another light as well.
Um, so I don't this is not a town center.
Um, so we're we're increasing the density, and we're almost thinking about creating another entire zoning based on a plan that's been delivered that I don't think will have any benefit for View Royal at all.
For existing residents, I'm I'm hampered to see without a single inch of commercial space, doctor space, how this will be of any benefit to the current residents of View Royal except increasing our total cost of servicing for this lot over time.
And I don't think amenity contributions will really kick in.
So my thought is that it is just too dense.
If this was a single apartment building in that location, I would approve it, but it's not.
It's a comprehensive complex development.
If this development was closer to Admiral's Walk or another town center, I would be approving it.
But I cannot really wrap my head around a value to view royal with this with this current development with zero commercial or office space.
Thank you.
Jerry?
I I would hope that a developer would would look at a community as a whole in a in a holistic way and think, you know, what does this community really need?
Does it need, you know, a whole lot, 300, you know, market priced houses, or does it need, you know, something that would work and add an enhance, add to an enhanced community?
And and I look at this and you know, what we need, if we need any any more housing it's housing that's affordable housing that's you know be below market and and it's not this um we need doctors you know it doesn't provide a space for doctors it doesn't provide a daycare so it doesn't it doesn't contribute to the community in a meaningful way and and I just see you know two big buildings and I don't see it adding and building two or four V Royal at this point.
Um and and also, you know, we've got right now there's a there's a lot of deep holes in the ground in this town.
Um one of them, boardwalks, is is gradually growing up, but it's still, you know, just above being a hole.
And that is that's been three, four years in the making.
And the other is at Helmkitton Island Highway.
So they're high profile prominent um holes that everybody is aware of and that don't seem to be becoming much more than holes.
And I don't know that the community that residents have much appetite for other holes right now.
Maybe, you know, maybe maybe they'll be more appealing once we see some pro progress on the other sites and there's people moving in and and there's amenities built around, but as it is right now, I'm just I it doesn't work for me.
Okay, thank you.
Gaming.
Thanks.
Well, this is this is a site that some of us have been wanting improvement for for decades.
Is that fair?
Ron and John?
Yeah.
For me.
I've I've watched the evolution of of these addresses over the past I don't know, six years.
And um we've been we've been wanting uh something to happen.
Something's happening.
But that's good.
Uh one thing I would say before I get into my um my comments, uh I I would uh you know, I would encourage my colleagues to just remind themselves that there's there's a an evolution to these processes and these applications.
And we always we can tinker, we can, we can tweak, um, and get where everybody needs to go.
So before it's a hard no, um I would just I would just ask that.
And I'm I'm always asking that myself too before I make a quick decision.
Location for for this is quite superb, to be honest with you.
Um it's it's as close to as good as it gets.
And I'll get to some other maybe aggravating factors that uh we can work on together.
Um, you've got trails, you've got buses, uh, you're you're in the core.
May I remind you, we're in the second biggest city in British Columbia, it's the capital city, Greater Victoria.
Development uh will always happen, and developers will always seek opportunities to uh remediate and take over uh older uh areas and and redevelop.
This this is something that's going to happen.
Uh, we do have holes in the ground.
Um, I look at that as a as a positive thing.
Uh thoughtful balanced development is something that we can all agree on.
And I think this this has that opportunity.
Um, I will say density and traffic.
Uh I do have some concerns there.
Um, and I know we've been through these kind of talks before, and the stories are proposed to be six.
Certainly, I would be more comfortable potentially with maybe one less, uh, lowering the the FSR, uh, the density on the whole package.
I would be more appealing, I think, to everybody.
Traffic uh it does concern me because to Counselor Rogers' point, it's inevitable that people seek alternate routes to get to need to where they go.
They just do.
We all know that, right?
Uh that needs to be done thoughtfully.
The one entrance off of Prince Robert.
Is that the yeah proposal?
So that's something that we're gonna need to that then.
I would encourage to um kind of workshop a bit.
Really promoting active transportation for a site like this is is critical.
It has the opportunity for cycling, pedestrians, and transit to be a legitimate selling feature.
I know we always talk about that, like you know, and it's oh, everyone's gonna bike.
They they don't, but this one does, you know, it could take that box.
And and I do actually think there are benefits for current and uh future View Royal residents here because young View Royal residents who are living with their parents or they're trying to make it in this crazy Canadian economy.
The first step is going to be either renting an apartment or buying an entry-level condo uh in in this country at this time.
So I would argue that it is providing that opportunity.
If you look at the economy and salaries, uh, that's where most of the young Canadians are gonna end up first.
So uh I do see a lot of positives and prepared to um, you know, in principle, support this.
Thank you.
Yeah, last but not hopefully not least.
Uh Don.
Um, first of all, kudos to the developer, kudos to staff to for working on this because each and every time I look at this, it looks better.
Um, I am still concerned about this, about the size, uh, definitely the heights of the six-story building for sure.
Um, nice to see that there's uh planning to have a community amenities room.
And if if uh the provincial government does uh uh change legislation so that uh new builds have to have a room that has to be able to be brought down to 26 degrees during heat waves, it could be that room, although 250 units or whatever it is, all the people jamming to that would be a little bit much.
Um and I am very disappointed about the trail in behind.
But certainly the uh the green space is great.
Um yeah again my biggest concern is just the uh the volume of traffic coming from the number of units and the heights of the buildings.
Thanks Don't from my perspective it this thing needs sort of a not a tweak but a major rewrite.
It's too high six stories the OCP was talking about four stories so six I I I just can't support um the traffic I think will be a nightmare and they will be using there will be rat running.
It's gonna, you know, for the harbor precinct, it's gonna have a huge negative impact.
Um, you know, everyone's gonna have to drive someplace from from here.
There's no close uh shopping.
Uh you know, I I just can't see that a lot of people doing a lot of walking.
I mean, there's some walk local walking areas, but if they want to get anything, they're gonna have to get in the car and drive.
Um we're talking about high-end rentals.
We're certainly not doing very much for, or it's doing nothing for affordability, and that's certainly a disappointment.
We don't have anything for affordable housing.
We've already got about 600 units currently, rental units currently being developed.
Um we don't know what the impact is gonna be on the town for having 600 rentals uh once once that's built out.
Something like this, I mean, I would prefer that it was waited, we waited until what we actually see with the impact of all the development we currently have going on, because like it's huge, what like you say, the number of holes we have in the ground, the number of new people we're gonna have.
And speaking of new people, as the RCMP uh pointed out in terms of the requirements for every 850 people, we need a new RCP officer.
So even for this project, you know, you're getting five to seven hundred people, you know, depending on how many people are in the rooms.
And again, if this were delayed, so it certainly didn't come in before uh the next census, it would make it more palatable because as soon as we get to uh 15,000, we're gonna be at 90 percent of our CMP costs instead of 70.
Um the whole issue about you know no fire access and so what this is gonna look like.
So I would think it's it's gonna have to be a major rewrite just to be able to get fire access here.
So it'll be interesting to see how that's what this thing looks like once that happens.
And again, four stories too much, and it's really for my perspective essential to deal with that whole potential for rat running.
So I mean, certainly as it is, I certainly couldn't uh support this moving forward.
Um, I just wondered when would the the opportunity be for us to debate these points?
Because um there's a number of um you know, in in my view, number of points you've raised that I would I I I take great exception to.
And I think um I I'm I I just don't want to sit here and s and you know, likewise you guys should be debating my points.
Um so that and I and then as sooner that we get to the public so that we can have that debate and you know, fill this room with those that are pros and cons, because the way I hear things, the if the applicant has had their open houses and they've been getting a lot of public support.
Well, well maybe there is.
Okay, John.
Well, tonight isn't the night to have that debate.
Because we don't know what the next project staff is going to come back and do another iteration based on the concerns people had.
And these are people's concerns.
They're not open for debate right now.
These are just people's current feelings from what they've heard.
Staff will then take back this information, work with the applicant, and they will eventually come back to us with something else that we then can determine whether or not we wish to proceed or not.
But so I'm sort of ending the discussion here on this item because again we aren't having a motion on what to do with this.
We're just simply having discussion.
This will be coming back to us.
So with that, I'm going to close this item off.
I will now bring on the far less controversial development variance permit for uh 25 Chancellor out and staff.
Thank you, worship Jeff Chow, Senior Planner.
This is an application for a development variance permit.
And the purpose of this presentation is to introduce the proposal to vary the requirements for the length of an accessory building and the separation of an accessory building from a principal building.
This property is a corner lot at the intersection of Chancellor and Connard near the Chancellor Watkiss Helmkin intersection.
Currently there's a single family dwelling on the property and an existing accessory building that was just recently removed that separates it from the rear yard.
It would be one story high, basically kind of a single-wide garage.
It's a little bit deeper than normal.
And the site plan there shows its location on the property.
In terms of zoning requirements, it requires it complies with all the requirements for width, setback from the lot lines, the lot coverage on the lot, and also meets the maximum size of total lot coverage and the maximum building height of uh 3.7 meters is below the 4.5 meter requirement.
The variance has requested for the length of the building to vary at from 7.5 meters to 9.15, and for the minimum separation of accessory building from three meters to 2.8.
The applicant's rationale for the request is they be they want to site the building on the existing footprint of the former building.
They would actually like to use part of the foundation that was that was there before.
And the idea of this keeping this building narrow and situated on existing hard surface would minimize intrusion into the rear yard, which features a large willow tree.
Staff doesn't object to the proposal.
Building staff have view of the property and looking at the partial foundation looks like it does have potential for reuse, but commonly a structural engineer would certify that will handle the new load.
Staff consider the variance for building separations is minor because 0.2 meters, 20 meters, and has um this would have no additional impacts on neighboring properties because it's on the same location.
Alternatives um for the committee is they may recommend to council they decline the application uh or refer the application back to staff if they wish to see further refinements to the requested variances uh the recommendation is to receive the report and uh if it's received then it can move forward to a council meeting once uh neighbors have been notified that concludes the presentation yeah the application question before i go on to allison um if there was if if there was one of those cute roof connectors from the building to the house, would it actually need any variance?
Um through the chair.
So if it was it was incorporated into the building, so it would have to be a heated covered connection.
So it has to be part of the building, not just a covered walkway.
Uh so that's just so uh whether it does that or not, I mean certainly the building would still be in the same location and the same height and siding.
Okay, but it wouldn't need a it wouldn't need to come here.
I think uh it would I guess if it's part of the building, then the length requirement doesn't come in either.
I anyway, so not that I'm suggesting that I was just curious as to whether it was that.
Allison?
No questions or real concerns at this point.
It'll be once um, I guess the as you said, the next step would be to let the neighbors know and get that feedback.
I think that's when um things might arise, but right now I'm good.
Don.
Look forward to hearing from the neighbors, but at this point don't have any concerns.
Sid.
Yeah, I just like the fact that they're reusing um a foundation that was already there and kind of building on that as a structure.
Um, say then uh getting rid of that and and still delivering what they want.
So I have no problems.
Okay.
I'm sure if it's the same size building and the same space, um it'll be fine.
I have no concerns.
Damien?
No issues done i't I like to make a motion to pass the staff recommendation i have no concerns second second okay all in favor against carried uh i just wanted to make sure i asked everybody given i missed a few people the last time we did this staff roundabout thank you uh this next um item is a request to amend the covenant for nine erskine lane um the uh the proposal is to the the is to replace the requirement for a roundabout at the intersection for erston lane and Watkiss way uh with a signalized intersection.
This map here shows the location of the proposed roundabout which is at the corner of Erskine Lane and Watkiss Way.
It relates to the rezoning of Nine Erskine Lane.
And the applicant has been working from the original counts concept for a round for circular standard roundabout and it became evident that there was some some space limitations and council may remember coming back to the the revised proposal for a more oval roundabout was proposed just to see if there was any council concern.
And the applicant has been working further with the design to look at the actual site details and site impacts.
And based on the land that's available, the trees in the area, also the topography of the area, because it slopes towards Stone Ridge, Stone Ridge Drive, they're finding they've come across a number of issues.
So one of the early proposals, there was no room for a sidewalk on the Stone Ridge Drive side of the intersection, the leg.
And even with the oval, the more oval configuration.
With the topography, this there's some there's a need to sort of extend the sidewalk further, which creates some site grading issues.
There's there are some retaining walls there already that would be that would have to be worked around.
And uh some encroachment on private property as well, which is um not really, you know, uh not really feasible to move forward without acquiring that land.
Uh additional trees would still have to be removed on Watkins Way, and we have to say some public concerns about that.
Um and which leaves us in a point where do you narrow the sidewalk or do you remove trees?
How do you balance that?
Uh when you narrow the sidewalks, that can create uh potential conflict between cyclists and pedestrians.
Um shifting this crosswalk at Stone Ridge Drive uh closer to Watkins Way is not recommended.
Um because uh again, because it can create more potential for rear end um collisions.
And the applicant has done more than 10 kind of different configurations and uh trying to move and shift this roundabout, and none provided an answer that could fit and provide the needed safety features.
So that's why the proposal of a signalized intersection is proposed instead.
From a staff perspective, um the roundabout was proposed through the applicant's public engagement process in the rezoning.
But the real priorities here are about improving having uh improving traffic calming on Watkins Way.
It is built to a high standard and cars can go there at a pretty high speed.
Um and the other concern for the neighborhood was being able to access Watkiss Way without too much inconvenience, especially if the uh number of residents increases on our skin lane.
Uh accord of the consultant study, um the uh signalized intersection could still meet these kind of objectives.
Staff suggests that um methods to improve traffic calming uh would help to meet that intent, and that includes and basically it means narrowing or reducing the visual openness of the roadway so the cars proceed a bit more um carefully through the uh through the intersection.
Uh there's different options that can uh that staff would like to see in addition to the uh to the proposal.
Um so that include things like changing the alignment of Watkins Way towards the signalized intersection so it's not a straight shot, um, which kind of that just that little bit uh will encourage vehicles to slow down a bit.
Uh there's different things that could be done, including a low height medium that provides a visual cue that you're entering an area of congestion or an intersection, uh, and looking at ways to improve uh the safety of active travelers on Watkins Way in accordance with the Active Transportation network Plan.
And that includes things like uh providing a separated sidewalk, you know, improving furnishing on the boulevard to sort of give more kind of again more sense of closure to the area, and adding a protected bike lane.
So a protected bike lane is shown in the picture here with the hard separation to travel lanes.
One of the things they had proposed in terms in this covenant amendment is maybe making the sidewalk on Erskine Lane is to do a three-meter multi-use path that would kind of encroach onto the property through a statutory right-of-way.
But staff consider that's really not the quite the right location for this.
Erskine lane is fairly steep, so when you have like a kind of a two-way kind of facility on a slope that can create some potential conflict.
And that means additional in a way to clear in the winter times.
The other factor here in case this case is the active transportation network plan does propose a multi use path on Talcott Road.
And I'll just kind of go back to the map here.
So that's the next intersection over.
And the reason that location is preferred, more preferred for a multi use path is because it's a bit shorter.
I believe steep less steep, but also the key factors it leads towards the elementary school.
So provides a better connection to Eagle View Elementary.
which is which is a an area that benefits uh telcit is intended to be a road that befits all ages and abilities all ages of ability corridor um and you don't need to duplicate that so the purple there's a so there is a plan to in the future to upgrade talcate so so it's really not necessary on erskine which will still have an acceptable level of active and pedestrian access so the staff recommend that the existing development requirements be maintained along the Erskine Lane frontage so in conclusion uh staff does support the proposal um because it it can be done in such a way that meets the original intent of the key uh factors which are slowing down traffic on Watkiss Way and uh and having a method that residents on Erskine Lane and Stone Ridge will still be able to access Watkiss Way in a in a safe and not too inconvenient manner.
So um if the committee supports the consideration of the proposal uh this covenant was enacted as part of a rezoning so a public hearing would be scheduled and all the people that were involved in the initial discussion for the rezoning and how this covenant came about they'll have an opportunity to provide a voice to the committee.
I understand there was some con some uh correspondence that was uh received for this item as well but but when the actual notice is conducted, uh that's the opportunity for the greater community to provide comment.
So the recommendation is to uh receive the report if there's any questions or comments, the uh the proponents are here as well.
Um and I'm here I can answer any questions you like.
Okay.
Thanks, Jeff.
Um so before we have our uh motion somewhere along the line, uh any questions of Jeff, and we'll start with Allison yet again.
That's good, John.
Yeah, thanks.
Um you know this um this whole thing was a uh um a community amenity.
The community wanted it.
And what they wanted most was for pedestrians, not vehicles, pedestrians to crosswalk this way safely.
So um I don't have uh any objection to it being a um a lighted intersection, that's fine.
But will it be pedestrian activated first of all I want to introduce you Jeff Child senior planner by day and senior engtech uh in training by night.
Um thank you for the presentation.
Uh so yes it would be signalized and there are other ways that we can that we could help pedestrian accessibility.
There is a um you can cue the lights so that uh pedestrians actually uh when the pedestrian signal goes for for they can cross there's actually a delay for when vehicles go in the same direction goes so that allows pedestrians to be in the intersection uh first before the vehicles can go.
That's actually a safe way of doing things.
And places in greater Victoria are doing that as well.
And that in the in in this uh uh traffic impact assessment update that has been mentioned, and that is supported by staff.
Okay, good.
Well, just keep going with the questions then.
Um so the when I read the report, it sounded like this was mainly for uh the residents of number nine, Erskine Lane, but um obviously it's uh and it's only just for the mornings, but I hope it's not just for the mornings that you know anybody that wants, I'm assuming that it's gonna be vehicle activated, right?
So it's it tells me it's not just the mornings, it is vehicle activated day and you know, a m p.m.
Yeah, so based on the the history of the initial engagement period of both um improving traffic flow for Erskine residents, i.e., uh their ability to go on to walk his way unimpeded, and also at the same time trying to tackle the challenge of improving uh traffic calming and walk us, they're actually two opposing uh thoughts.
Um does provide that, however, uh, through many iterations.
And I do know that uh through the chagrin of the applicants of me asking them for proof beyond a reasonable doubt that around what can't fit, um, there are options to make that make an intersection improve those two items.
And with the ability of timing it so that in the peak in the peak AM where the majority of traffic is going out of Erskine, um certainly there should be a priority there.
And then in the PMs that actually changes and more residents are actually making a left turn in.
And then that in itself there is less onus on the traffic signal timing by doing that.
And certainly that's something that staff would uh work with the applicant and their engineer on as part of a detail design.
Yeah it thank you it would certainly be helpful to to see a picture of what this intersection is going to look like where the crossworks or where the activations is for cars, bikes, people, um, and how it ties into Erskine lane and and the the sidewalks and the the uh the bike lane and we're we're clear that it's going to be a separated pedestrian sidewalk and bike lane, right?
Uh just for clarification, uh on Erskine Lane.
Uh the design on Erskine Lane will remain the same as it was during rezoning.
So that's not going to change.
Uh what's going to change is the uh the frontage along Waukis Way.
And as in the report we mentioned that it would uh staff recommend council uh move forward with the design stipulated active transportation and network plan, which are wider bike lanes with a point six meter buffer, uh one pointy sidewalks, I believe, and uh they say a um a uh furnished area, which is basically a boulevard.
So we we want to make sure that's when the applicant comes back with drawings that they reflect that, and that would certainly be presented as part of public hearing.
Is it coming?
Oh yeah, okay.
So I really hope that, and I don't know if I need to make a motion, but I really hope that that the drawings of what Erskine is going to look like is is uh is gonna come before council before it's cast in stone or concrete.
I think at this time that the the report is based on whether or not we are going with a roundabout or a signalized intersection.
Um certainly when it comes to a the public hearing process, I think that's that will be what will be presented.
Um, certainly we can show what was approved as part of results um on the drawings for the approach to the intersection.
Yeah.
So yeah, indeed.
Um the public will definitely want to see pictures because you know, Verbiage isn't gonna do it for them.
Um, and the last comment, thank you for the um uh the latest update on on the traffic study.
Really amazing.
I couldn't believe there's gonna be 133 cars making left-hand turns in the morning uh out of Erskine.
So yeah, we sure need something to get them out and the other people there.
And I also like the uh the report where there's a specific unnotation about triple A connection to the Galloping Goose.
And I really hope we get that um in place soon because that's a definite uh safety issue for cyclists.
That's it.
Yeah, I'm I'm completely on board to having walked the site and hearing neighbors' concerns.
There's just no geometry that would work aroundabout right there without you know buying land that with a roundabout you'd have to lose the stone ridge sign that's in the stone.
It would forever even change things.
And and I think this way would be safer.
I was quite surprised on the dip on the other side uh in Stone Ridge.
There is about a 12 foot drop in behind the trees into somebody's backyard uh to come flying off that roundabout on the wrong way.
So I think this is the right move.
The I I do have a question for staff about it.
That um I won't call it natural, but it's the road type covering uh on top of I think a C RD water main that is on the south side of nine Irkskin.
Uh, I believe it's CRD property, and I think regardless of what we want to do with it, it will be considered a town trail by residents and they will take it.
Um, but Ivan, you've got your hand.
It's just like the big rocks right now that are kind of as uh yeah, Mayor Tobias and through the chair.
You're you're talking about that trail system between those two lots, right?
Yes, so um staff have been actioned to work with the property owners to secure a um official right of way through there for public access.
So that'll be both with the landowner uh by the hospital as well as the CRD who owns that parcel of the land, Jerry I'm I'm just I'm surprised this is here.
But there's so many meetings and uh so much time spent uh during the rezoning process um for the roundabout and and then it came back as an ovalabout and uh I'm I'm just surprised anyway.
I I thought I thought it was in stone, but I guess not.
So if this is what needs to happen in order for everybody to be safe, I'm just a little surprised we didn't figure that out earlier.
Well, I'm surprised too, but I'm also disappointed because I'm pretty shocked to actually have to read this tonight um on various levels, because this is you know part of the deal, so to speak.
And I would suspect that when this goes to public hearing, there there will be a lot of questions.
Um I'm certainly not an engineer, and I trust Jeff and Ivan and their decision making and their review process, but for this to be changed at this point is uh it's concerning.
It was a big selling feature for me um on this project.
Uh, you know, there's a lot happening in that area.
There's an elementary school.
Um, anyways, we'll we'll get to that later.
Um, my question to probably Ivan or maybe even Kim.
So since this potentially could be downgraded to a traffic control device at this intersection, uh, my understanding is the developer was going to pay for the roundabout.
Is that correct?
Okay.
Let's talk about um, and I know you don't know the numbers now.
I'm pretty confident saying it's gonna be uh less expensive to build an intersection with traffic control devices.
So tell me how that's going to work out.
Uh the so through the chair, the applicant would still be required to pay for that intersection and the furniture improvements in full for that, much the same as a roundabout.
Um, in terms of costs, uh the costs are the costs.
They applicant has uh we have a secured um servicing agreement with them.
So what that means is that they have uh secured secure with us a bond to uh for the roundabout, which is a large sum of money.
And so they are they they basically have to put in an intersection to the satisfaction of the town before they get that security back.
Um that said, uh the town will be looking at um additional infrastructure, enhancement infrastructure, such as wider bike lanes, uh wider sidewalks, um buffers, and all that.
That does uh increase the cost of a traditional intersection as well as medians as well.
Um, I can't tell you the difference in costs right now as it stands.
Um certainly is something that we might be able to dig through, but at this time, uh, we don't have a design yet of the intersection, but there are some high-level costs we could come up with.
Yeah, I guess, you know.
You want the money, the difference.
Well, I, you know, we sat here a couple weeks ago talking about Atkins Road and how much the roundabout's gonna cost.
And uh I would suspect that uh traffic controlled intersection will not cost anywhere close to that much.
So I guess, you know, further discussion and review and investigations needed, but I certainly am not comfortable, you know, for our constituents uh with this uh switch.
And that's not necessarily a derogative term, it's just it is a switch, right?
Thank you, Don't yeah, Councillor Matson, you're doing a great job of chairing this portion of the meeting.
However, if I can make a suggestion seeing as how it's NHL fantasy uh draft time usually whoever gets last pick gets first pick in the second round and reversing again so I'm getting the last the last kick at the cat here and by the time it's getting to me there's not much more I can say.
Anyway, you know my feelings about roundabouts but I have to I have to agree with uh uh Counselor Qualwich because uh to me this particular roundabout would be way more important than the one a six mile and Atkins road, but that's just my own opinion.
Thank you.
And I will keep that in mind for the last go around.
I'm just trying to overcompensate for be abusing poor old Allison at the last meeting or ignoring her.
Yeah, I I'm really actually miffed that we that the traffic circle is is now no longer viable it seems.
I mean we so we had many discussions on this and then we staff brought us the oval.
Um so I I mean personally I'd really like to see if we could make a traffic circle work up here before we go and make the decision to put in a traffic light because again uh as an amenity for the residents, I just think a traffic circle is way better than than a light.
So staff, I don't know what you do with that, but um are there other options?
I mean could can you make it more oblong as stated in the report there was a over 10 iterations that was done.
Um staff can look at see if there's 11 or 12.
I have a feeling that's in order for a roundabout to work, then some sacrifices may need to be done for pedestrian accessibility.
May need to go back to the original of uh not having a crosswalk across Stone Ridge and then have them go down um the trail uh that's behind Stone Ridge.
That might, but I the last time the staff have gone through a lot of iterations with the with the applicants engineer.
And the the reason why it's here to you today is because through quite a bit of geotechnical and civil analysis grading survey, uh the design would encroach into private property, which is something the town does not want to happen, nor it it should.
So that's the reason why it's brought to you today.
But that said, um, staff can certainly look to see if there's any other iterations and and come back.
But so all I can do is ask my colleagues whether they would like to see you know one more kick if they can in terms of a traffic circle.
I mean, so let's just have a quick raise hand.
So if it I I don't want to have a huge discussion on this, how many would like to see staff go back and spend a bit of time see if we can get another iteration?
Just a hand show of hands.
So Don, it does that mean your hands are down?
Yes, I uh we're looking at to receiving the port report for information, and I think staff's got some feedback from us.
So I'd be quite happy to pass at this time make a motion to pass the recommendation.
Second.
I'm just trying to make sure what the recommendation is there.
Well, yeah, we receive the report, but at this point, staff isn't gonna go back and do another iteration unless we want them to.
At this point, we'd have to tell them.
I I don't want to waste staff's time.
I don't want to do I I don't want to send them off on a goose chase that's just dumb.
Um so if it's at all if it if it's if it's ridiculous, no.
Um staff, is it is it viable?
Is it feasible?
Is it worth a kick?
Staff's recommendation is to go with the signal simply because it provides better accessibility for pedestrians and non-vehicles.
That's no answer.
Sure.
We had Damien first.
Yeah.
I mean, maybe I'll state the obvious, but if there's all this discussion about not wanting to impede on to the private land at Stone Ridge, uh, the developer has plenty of land that they own that they could uh you know build around about more that way.
So I mean, there's there are ideas left.
I mean, that point wasn't brought up and maybe it has and wasn't recorded.
Yeah, that was looked at.
That was one of the first things a staff asked.
Um, and the issue is actually the daycare site in the corner, and by shifting it northeast, um, it actually clips that property and also provide it uh exacerbates their access actually to the business.
I do have a a question on impact, just talking about roundabouts and our discussion and approval for the six-mile roundabout that Don didn't want.
Um that are we reasonably sure we've got enough space before we progress?
Because I understand that we only found out that this really wouldn't work when we got to the detailed drawings.
We're not gonna make the same mistake twice.
That's what that's exactly what I want you to say.
I would think John.
Yeah.
Um, I'm sure staff are really on um uncomfortable about having to come back and uh and shoot a uh uh you know a roundabout that everyone wanted.
So it's you know, with 10 iterations, trying to make it work, hope even the oval was going to be problematic, I think, for for probably fire vehicles.
So um, you know, let's we tried, and the only other solution is to expropriate property.
And I don't think it because that would make a roundabout a little more expensive.
Okay, so what I'm hearing is as much as some of us are are miffed, uh we there's not much we can do about it, and it seems that we have to go for the uh traffic signals with uh uh additional enhancements to improve safety and for cycling and pedestrians, etc.
This is that what I'm hearing, just uh Nicole, a question?
Yeah, sorry.
Okay.
I'll look.
Question.
Yeah.
That's your question.
Um I'm not sure if it was responded to earlier.
Will there be one of those uh things that when you you're on your bike that notices or is aware that there's a bike waiting there?
And you know, like they have along the EN in some places.
Um there's there's a couple of technologies there.
One's the actual signal loop, which is a loop in the ground, much like vehicles, and the other one is uh what we actually have at the Burnside Walkas intersection, which is a sensor.
Um at this point, I can't say for sure.
I would lean on it not being warranted, uh simply be given the area.
But that said, we can certainly work with the applicant to see if it's actually warranted or not.
Um if the volumes are high, like if the volumes of traffic going uh of cyclists and pedestrians going through there is significantly high, like we see at Burnside Waukas, then absolutely, and that's where you see it in ENN and other uh important intersections.
Uh for this one, I'm I'm not too sure the if the counts warrant it.
Certainly we'll we can um work with the with the applicant's engineer on that.
Okay, let's call a question.
All those in favor?
Opposed carried uh review of business licenses cannabis thank you your worship uh this item has to so in 2022 um uh staff was asked to look into this issue for for on business license fees for uh cannabis retail stores.
So tonight's uh presentation is about the staff report, which will cover how the fee was established, what the RCMP experience has been with retail cannabis stores uh a scan of the fees in the region, what are the financial implications for the town if there are changes to the fees, and what options could be considered.
So business licenses are established to cover the general cost of administration, bylaw enforcement, policing, and necessary views and inspections relating to business operations.
So in April 2020, when cannabis retail stores were um legalized in the province and and implemented in the zoning bylaw, council approved the business license fee of $7,500 per year for a cannabis retail store based on anticipated costs for education and enforcement.
At the time business license fees because it was a there were some kind of pilot programs run in Victoria and Vancouver, they were 33,000 in Vancouver and 5,000 in Victoria in and Landford did a temporary use permit kind of program for them.
Those fees are now 5,000 in in Vancouver and 1500 in Victoria.
So obviously this merits some review.
Staff asked a number of questions to the RCMP and about the impacts that cannabis retail stores have had on calls for service.
And overall the impact has been very minimal.
Most municipalities don't charge a special business license fee for uh cannabis retail use.
Uh there's a couple that don't permit cannabis retail uses, but the ones where they do, they charge them the regular fees of one to two hundred dollars, depending on the square footage of the property of the of the business.
Uh so View Royal is the first at $7,500 a year.
The next highest is a Squimalt at $2,000 a year.
And uh third is Victoria at uh $1,500 a year, although in their case they do charge a one-time rezon, uh kind of a special rezoning fee for them.
Uh and finally, uh North Sainwich has a uh where they allow uh cannabis production, uh where they have sales on on in the ALR, that fee is $500 a year.
Um Central Sandwich's fee is actually uh offer ALR production sites ten dollars a year.
Um but uh so so you can see the uh the town is an extreme outlier.
So Jeff, just one question for you.
I was speaking to uh an individual, Counselor Rogers and I spoke to earlier who was uh who'd won an RFP, and he said they were paying four percent of uh gross revenue.
And I I have a I didn't get a an answer back from him because I was trying to clarify the your one time hundred to two hundred dollar fee when again according to him it was you know considerably more.
So I just wanted to know where that number came from and are they still getting the you know uh yeah that gross that gross fee.
Yeah, through the shares as I understand it, Langford did a kind of an RFP process and they were administered through temporary use permits.
So those aren't permanent.
It's just for the some understandings that would be for the duration of the program.
If they're so that's been so temporary use permits are good for three to six years, so I imagine they may have a different strategy for long term.
I don't know.
But okay, so they still could be paying that very high fee and yeah, I don't know.
We can again which staff can do further research on that.
Thank you.
So again, looking at our our business license fee schedule, um, cannabis retail store is the highest at $7,500 per year.
The next highest is for stores to sell drug paraphernalia, headshops, and everything else is uh under 200 a year, um, except for it's also the sliding scale.
So uh the cannabis retail stores is the highest rate.
There's only one uh cannabis retail store in View Royal.
Um, and in terms of so that one retail store at $7,500 contributes 13% of the town's annual business license revenue, which is $5,800.
So um, so if a change, it will it will be a big change to the percentage change to the annual town's annual business license revenue, but uh but the actual difference is is not a large amount in terms of the the grand the grand scheme of things.
Uh staff recommends um uh a fee of $2,000 a year, which is the same as drug peripheral business.
For example, uh in these um cannabis retail stores, the province would allow them to sell some accessory type devices.
Uh but the options include maintaining the existing fee of $7,500 a year, uh changing it to $2,000 a year, or $3,000, which is $300, which is the same as liquor sales.
And cannabis retail is licensed by the by the same provincial branch and follow very similar licensing kind of rules.
And final option is possibly change it to a regular commercial business license, which is one to two hundred dollars, depending on whether they're less than 5,000 square feet or over 5,000 square feet.
So that uh the 2024 business license renewals can be sent out in December.
So we'll have to prepare a bylaw for council consideration pretty quickly.
So that concludes the presentation um if there's any questions i'd be happy to follow in the nfl draft rules we'll go to dawn next thank you uh ron yeah i like the report and yeah it seems to me that uh they're not getting the revenue expected from the cannabis stores and a lot of them are in trouble and i would prefer to see them to continue operating personally i think it's be fair for option three to keep them the same price as uh liquor facilities thank you damien yeah i was just gonna move staff's recommendation for 2000.
I'll second that, but I do have a question.
Is it too late for a question?
That's just to staff.
Um Jeff, have we had any um inquiries about establishing a cannabis store and they've been and they found the um the business license fee prohibitive?
Uh Future, I don't know the answer to that offhand.
Uh we haven't had too many inquiries since this bylaw was passed.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, John.
Go ahead.
Thank you.
Um yes, uh I I made the motion to uh for this review and and thank your staff for bringing it forward.
Great report.
Um actually I think we should go lower than two thousand.
The City of Victoria is fifteen hundred.
Um and they've um I and I think that's reasonable uh to uh have that uh that amount um I don't want to uh you know just because the squamous got two thousand, uh I think uh we should you know go halfway between three hundred and seventy five hundred and that makes it fifteen hundred.
So I would hope that um uh the mover would uh and second it might consider a lower amount.
Thank you.
Allison.
I I I it does look quite a large number, but if it's not broken, I'm not sure why we're trying to fix it.
If uh to counselor lemon's point, if we're not having businesses approach us saying they're interested, but the fee.
Um and if we were to reduce it, we're technically as as staff said, we're losing that money.
So now we need to have three, four businesses if we reduce the fee to make up for the 7500 that we're currently receiving.
So I I just don't see the need to spend staff's time in revising this when there doesn't seem to be an issue with the current status.
Damien.
I'll withdraw my motion uh and uh move for a fifteen hundred dollar fee.
And if I'm seconded, I'll uh second motivate.
Okay.
I'd like to motivate because it's uh ethical, it promotes transparency, it shows good governance uh and fairness a second question yeah I do but I just want to say a seconder um we had 7500 because we were um and we'd made a commitment to invest in programs and we haven't done so so if we're not if we're not uh spending the money uh as per the expectations of council um and uh at the time it seems reasonable to do that but yeah no that the formile um folks um that uh have the uh the the store in B Royal.
They've got one in in Culwood and they only have to pay $200 a year so um the comparisons um um I think is is really important to uh um to be in um more regionally consistent.
So just in call the question Mr.
Chair.
Well you gotta call it the Robert rule of order you've got to call it okay okay I'm assuming that we should be going to be taking over as chair for council and maps.
Uh apparently I am.
Uh the next item is uh staff report for um urban.
I'm sure I didn't sorry I didn't hear the hear the vote, and I think uh staff that's recording uh didn't hear the vote either.
Or was there a vote taken on the last motion?
There was.
There was, but uh one opposed, which was myself, and the others were four.
Okay, okay.
I'd be marked as uh uh for fifteen hundred dollars.
Yeah, I'm supporting it.
Okay, so we just had one opposed, and that was Councillor McKenzie for $1,500.
I didn't hear that.
Thank you.
For some reason the sound went, and I think staff uh lost it too, so I think I got it now.
Thanks, Councillor Brown.
So staff for report on urban development institute.
Thank you.
So the purpose as you've heard earlier today from the guest in our public participation section, the purpose of UDI is to support industry professionals and affiliates with the information, education, and representation they need to thrive in the region's local development industry.
In addition, they support and represent strong relationships with government, media, and the public.
They work with communities and governments to build balanced, well planned, sustainable communities through thoughtful urban planning, steady growth, and responsible development practices, improving affordable housing and job opportunities within the local industry.
Membership benefits include they remain informed of policy changes at all levels of government.
We receive information on current market trends and projections.
We have opportunity to network and build partnerships with industry professionals.
We attend professional development opportunities, some of which are only available to members.
We establish UDI liaison groups made up of local stakeholders and department heads to discuss emergency emerging issues and how UDI may be able to assist with policy initiatives and provide feedback.
In addition, they promote engagement events through the UDI network, and they increase transparency to all stakeholders represented by the varied membership of UDI.
We became a member of UDI in January of 2023.
The annual fee is $600, and in the past 13 years, UDI lobbying has never been recorded or recognized as part of a council agenda.
Current government memberships for the Capital region include the CRD, Langford, Collarwood, Souk, Esquimalk, View Royal, Oak Bay, and the City of Victoria.
UDI is also popular in the Pacific region out of Vancouver, including Port Moody, Delta, Pemberton, Campbell River, Coquitlin, the City of Coquitlam, Langley, Maple Ridge, Surrey, New West, North Van, District of North Van, Metro Vancouver, and the Township of Langley.
In Fraser Valley, the city of Chiliwack and the City of Abbotsford are members of UDI.
In the Okanagan, Summerland, Beachland, Kelowna, Vernon, Penticton, West Kelowna, and Lake Country are all members of UDI.
That's the um the presentation we have at the mayor's level participated with UDI in various events over the years.
Um today there was a luncheon uh presentation from four mayors giving feedback in terms of their experience since the election.
Um that's our report, and uh the report was made at the request of council in terms of considering whether or not we should continue participating with UDI.
Thank you, Kim.
Uh turn to council for move your seat.
Second seat.
Uh we got a mover and a seconder um discussion.
Council McKenzie.
Uh thank you.
I I'm all for staff having access to you know different best practices for policies and different perspectives, but I think there are many more objective sources of information and academic institutions that I would prefer us to rely on more heavily than the uh resources available through the UDI.
And I'm sure if we did need to engage with the developers, that the UDI would be more than willing because it would be in their interest for us to engage with them and to give feedback without us having to pay into this membership.
Councillor Lemon and then I made the motion.
You said you did you second?
Who second?
I made it.
You seconded.
Anyway, I I I um I think staff or the experts in what they need and the education and networking available to that to them through this particular organization, which has um a long history in British Columbia and uh is active and um perhaps the only resource of its type available to them.
So I support this.
Thank you, Councillor Lemon.
Counselor Rogers?
I I would um I I could agree with Councillor Um Mackenzie.
This um there are other organizations.
This is um its headline of the website is the premier voice of the BC real estate development industry.
Developers.
This is this is all about developers, and I I think um and Fortis is is in there, the Fortis BC of development.
So it's uh I'm I'm really concerned about this organization.
I think it has a bias of development, a bias of you know, removing green space, you know, for buildings.
Uh it's um, I would hope that we could get um solicit a uh an organization that is really rounded on the merits of climate change and the merits of protecting the green space, and it's not just real estate or real estate companies, developers anxious to continue their business.
So I would hope that uh we'd look to a a better, more rounded uh firm instead of investing six hundred dollars in this organization.
Uh just giving you an opportunity.
Thank you, Councillor Rogers.
Counselor Brown, I can't see your hand up or not.
Yeah, I'm still here at uh what's it two two something a.m.
You know, yeah, it well, it's hardly any money for one thing, and I can see the value of it.
Um I can see other points as well, but I think that we I I would support the motion.
It's just uh to me it's uh even if it was a considered a a lobby group, but uh because it's got s staff people involved in it.
I can't really see it as that.
But um, and there's tons of lobby groups out there if that's the case.
No, I'll be supporting the motion.
Supporting the motion to receive the report, just to get you right?
Yes, that's correct.
Easy decision.
Okay.
Um, any other comments?
Councilor Quillage.
Uh I I promote uh our staff members to continue to learn and benefit from this long standing institute who has deep roots in the province with every major city and town across the province.
Thank you, Councillor.
I I guess my concern is that uh when first elected, um I was looking at just about everything, and the town of View Royal was not listed on their website as a member.
And then in January, without it coming to council, I see us being listed as a member.
It's not the development staff of the town of View Royal, it's the town of View Royal.
My concern was is that we go through great efforts to have debate on the things that we join, and it never came to us.
And the only way I found out about it was it got flagged by uh counselor in Sanich, who have since not uh chosen not to uh renew their membership in the group.
And it wasn't the concern that I believe that this group does any harm at all, it's a perception of bias of now that we've got a membership.
That is my concern that that we're not uh we haven't opened our uh doors to other memberships of other groups that could have disseparate views on things.
My concern is is that we're paying for a membership that's promoting something that I don't know what they're promoting, but we're a member of it.
We're a member of uh UBCM.
We're a member of AVIC but those decisions have come from this council to be member of.
So I'm I'm just concerned that um this membership get taken out without council being taken into consideration, considering we look at um you know grants and aids for a few hundred dollars uh to put our name behind support.
And even though it's not amount of money that I'm concerned with, I'm just concerned that um our membership here now is uh is on a website and they could be advancing an agenda we may not agree with and we have no control of it, and nor do we vote to join it.
So those are my concerns.
If we call the question, I'm gonna make another.
We can call the question, that will bring us to a vote.
And it's it's uh for receipt, but we can we can call the question now for sure.
So we'll call the question on uh move receipt of the report staff report.
All in favor.
Uh see your hand up so passes unanimously.
Uh I'd like to make a subsequent motion, please.
I move that uh um that the uh membership to the UID um be um discontinued in 2024.
I'll second that.
Thank you, Councillor Rogers.
Any comment for discussion?
Yes, uh speaking to that, um I I um I note with um I think respect that uh Sanitz has discontinued their uh um um their membership.
There's only six municipalities, six or seven out of the thirteen.
I I think there are other organizations that um would um deliver um just as good guidance and support without it being uh specifically focused on um uh development.
Um yeah, we have the guidance of the Chamber of Commerce and the South Island Prosperity.
Um we can find someone that uh has a better rounded position.
Thank you, Councillor Rogers.
Any other further comment?
Um I I see a hand there, uh Councillor Brown.
Yeah, um we're a member of South Island Prosperity Partners as well, and that's that's way more than eight hundred dollars.
I I can't remember the exact amount, but I believe it's in the neighborhood of over a little over twenty thousand dollars.
And I'm I suppose the previous council approved this, but certainly not the uh new council.
So if we're starting to look at groups that we belong to and we pay into, and we're gonna look into this one, we should be looking into all of them.
But this this is a small group, and it's uh to me it sounds like an educational group, and and it uh it to me it's not a lobby group, but I mean if it became that, yes, by all means ax it.
But personally, I don't see it that way.
Okay, uh thank you, Councillor Brown, Councillor Lemon.
Yeah, briefly, um, council doesn't vote on staff education and courses and the organizations that they belong to, and they would largely be the beneficiaries of this.
Council Lemon, uh or Councillor Qualwage, please.
I can uh empathize with some of the views that I've heard in regards to this vote.
And uh I will acknowledge that um some council members are seeking more communication and transparency with the groups that our staff joins.
Uh that being said, uh I think this is something that our staff has joined because they want to benefit from and make better decisions and help us.
So for that reason, I'm supporting it.
I'm sure that this is all being uh they're paying very close attention to our comments, and I'm I'm certain that um you know if we can keep the uh UDI membership for staff that uh it can be um a moment that we all uh think fondly of in the future.
Thank you, Counselor Quellett's counselor McKenzie.
Just in response to Counselor Lemon's comments, it's not if if these were courses and and things that staff individually were part of or a membership they in as a staff member were part of, however, it's not it's saying the town is part of this membership.
So that's where the for me the issue is, and it's not um to uh counselor Brown's point.
I I'm not saying I believe that they are a lobbyist group, it's more the perception of our community when we have policy come forward and decisions made that we can um be transparent and and clear that we're not going into it with a bias based on our membership thank you councillor McKenzie counselor well counselor McKenzie i can't help but uh point out that that is probably not the strongest argument if you just look up on the screen there uh by your rationale every single town and city up there is being influenced by UDI and should remove it themselves immediately.
Okay.
You counselor Roger.
And if you look at the memberships um if you look at the um municipal liaison committees, you know, that is also very insightful.
You know, Burnaby, Richmond, whatever, you know, and um it's all made up of development.
Uh, you know, you have the municipalities of of uh Burnaby, but that committee is 99% developers.
And that influence.
So there's a message there.
Now, if let me ask you a question.
Um, the annual membership fee is paid what through the town's taxes.
Is it a taxable?
Do we pay it through resident taxes?
As we do most all our expenditures, yes.
Yes.
So again, it's a tax based point that is as I think a public perception, hence the motion.
Okay, so we'll call the question on the motion that Councillor Rogers had made about not extending the membership past 2024.
All those in favor of Councillor Rogers' motion.
All those opposed.
So it's a tie and it is defeated because uh tie goes to um those opposed to it's like that.
So um that motion was not successful.
So we've we've received the uh report already.
And now I think we can go to uh passing the chair over to counselor Rogers for transportation.
Okay.
I had a very long list for chair's report, but I'm gonna save you the anguish next time.
So let's move straight into the CRD transportation governance questionnaire, please.
Chair.
Can I get an extension?
May I have an extension to 1030, please?
A motion.
I'll move that.
Second.
Second it.
Okay, uh, that's one if we've almost fell asleep, eh?
Are there those in favor?
Don, did you vote in favor?
Uh it's almost 3 a.m., so no, just for that reason.
Okay.
Thank you, Chair.
Ivan the Young Director of Engineering and Parks.
Um, I come forward to you more of a facilitator in this case.
So we're in the final stages of uh the CRD transportation governance workbook.
Um at the last council meeting, uh the goal was to uh provide individual responses to staff to collate and to present at this meeting.
And so the purpose of the meeting is to kind of uh ultimately complete a unified response to the questionnaire.
So, usually when it comes to IAPT engagement, we we the objectives are very clear, the outputs are very clear.
We want to have a record of decisions made and directions to staff with respect to a unified response.
Where we're gonna kind of live in right now is kind of in this area here.
So I will say that after collating all the results, and um in the report, you'll notice that there was six responses, but we did get a late submission.
So we actually have all seven responses, and this presentation will reflect that.
Um but essentially there was a lot of I would say uh similar responses, and then there is a few that were near a tie.
So um we'll likely be uh delivering a a bit with that.
And um uh counselor Rogers as chair, um uh you and i'll be working to kind of go through these and to come up with a unit five response for each question.
Um, I do understand that there may be some deliberation on a few of them um i will say this that if uh after some deliberation that's uh that answer cannot or a single response cannot be done um what we may be able to do is to uh not check the box and then provide comment in question seven so that is always an option as well yes and and in interest of time um i i just want to i'm hoping that perhaps um uh members would um look at and like for the sake of argument let's look at question number one, A, the funding.
And um it you know if if you took it by votes, it's four to three.
Is that enough to uh motivate us to move on to the next one and and agree to um um the one before votes?
Would so do we do our responses are are are they revealed through Ivan then?
Is that what you're saying?
Like they would yeah, okay, perfect.
That's fine.
Yeah, that's fine.
I I'm okay with it if everyone else.
That'll certainly get us through it um before 1 a.m.
If A is has um has four votes, if you like, for given a limited pool of prioritized uh investments and regional transportation and investment and infrastructure improvements.
Is that um are we satisfied to present that to CRDs as a final result from the questionnaire remember others can be bought can I buy anybody um um I'm I'm I'm just gonna jump to my bottom line here and that is I I see this as um a drain on the tax dollars that might otherwise have gone to projects in our town that we are in in view royal are very unlikely to see um projects that directly benefit us.
Projects will benefit the region, but I see um transportation infrastructure here um being depleted because of another taxation authority being established.
So you'll see that in that first one, I voted, I was one, you know, I was one of the three that voted for local infrastructure for that reason alone.
So that's that's kind of my starting place for this.
So uh, you know, I um I'm just gonna I I can see the majority feel feel otherwise on that point.
I I'm just putting it out there that that's my concern.
Yes, I'm sorry, thank you.
Uh yes, Gosh Lab.
Yeah, thank you.
I don't see the need to go through this question by question for one.
And the reason I voted on this one in particular is because we had a presentation from CRD.
I worked for CRD for 18 years.
When I started the CRD, I reported directly to the CAO.
Then they created a general managers position.
Then they created a senior manager position.
I would have liked to have asked.
I didn't get the opportunity, but if they come back again, I'm gonna ask them how many more senior managers' positions is this gonna create?
How many more managers positions is this gonna create?
There's already 125 exempt managers at the C or D.
Personally, almost every question in the survey, I point went towards more local local stuff rather than falling into the big VAT void of the CRD.
Yes.
I agree.
I think overall my questions probably all were similar that in comparison of our regional transportation versus our local, our regional isn't that bad.
And if you don't have good connections from our local neighborhoods to those main transit uh corridors, then there's no point in in making improvements to them.
So I I think overall I also leaned more towards the local um spending.
Just a point of order uh for consideration, Chair, we agreed that we would move on after uh a majority.
So I'm just uh inquiring if there'll be discussion and debate on every one because there's several.
Yeah.
I think we're trying to get a flavor of why you know people are voting and and it it's um it's quite obvious when you go through it, the pattern of of what people are concerned about.
But I also um would like to point out that staff support was was um uh also useful in their reflections and talking about you know the tax base and the fact that you know the town will still have the casino, we still have our tax base.
The I think the limited pool of funding is referenced to federal, provincial, uh those kind of funds for these large projects that are going to be addressing a regional issue.
And believe me, we've got many regional issues.
If if um we've got 13 municipalities and 92 mayors and counselors that were willing to look at just their bailiwick, then we will go nowhere in terms of a transportation governance.
There will be no CRD, we'll still be a shattered piece, little pieces of fiefdoms.
So um I think this is what we're trying to do is come together in a in a in a global context and uh get people moving in this region.
So if that's that's an another take of of this whole scene.
May I uh seek um I don't know if we're gonna have to move um motion by motion in in this, but what's the preference?
How are we gonna do this?
This is probably the hardest one.
Yeah.
That's great.
That's good news.
That's the hardest one.
So the second question and a third question you'll notice are very quick, but this is a good flavor for for the hardest that I think.
And the sorry, and the problem is that we could have, because we don't have councillor Mattson here, we could have this one as a as a you know, someone make the motion, great.
Then the other then it'll be a three-tree, and we're dead in the water, and we still haven't been able to move this forward and uh present it to um um charity in in our deadline.
Uh Kim.
When the when the CRD um presented this, they did talk about where you want no decision made in terms of local versus regional.
You just respond that way by clicking on both, and that's the outcome.
It it becomes uh an issue that's not addressed by that transportation governance.
So what you're saying is if it's vote-based.
If you choose one or the other, they will focus on one or the other.
If you choose both, they focus on neither.
So Ivan, can you work with that?
Can you work with what you've got?
Having the you know the j you know the the general theme of our concerns.
Can you can you develop a uh comprehensive but pointed um package or individual form or whatever to the CRD?
Well they they do want us to focus on their various questions, but for those questions where you can't decide in about local versus regional by choosing both, they ignore the vote entirely.
So in other words, we will have no voice we're not gonna so if we this is the first amendment we've seen there if you go through here there's a lot of 434343 so i i suspect that view o will be able to succeed in having no voice in this in the we'll see we certainly won't have any voice on this particular matter on funding uh it's just a question through you mr chair to ivan um was your intention to go through each question with the remaining time we have this evening.
Uh through the chair, if i could just for example scroll to the next one.
This says all.
I'm assuming that we'll be spending maybe 10 seconds on this.
And then the one after that is seven versus one.
So there this like I mentioned is the hardest.
So there or six versus one.
And uh as the Sirius said, yeah you could choose both um also at the same time for question seven you can j you we could provide comment onto why it was challenging to answer it.
But again it is uh like Kim has said um by choosing none then the uh the opinion is nullified so let's let's maybe what we want to do is we want to skip this one, get down through and see where we're at and maybe come back to it.
Okay.
All right.
Okay.
So we have B.
I think we're all good on B.
Thank you.
Can you take us to the next one?
C.
Are we happy the fact that you know it's it is the majority that had to supported that?
Okay.
Okay, moving on to the next one.
What a role.
D.
Okay, four three.
Are we happy to support that one on a majority vote?
Okay, this is all about regional trails and the whole broad thing, like wonderful things of trail widening.
So I think um we're we're good with that.
I mean yeah I mean obviously I feel so I feel strongly about where I put it because I think if you can't ride your bike to the ENN then that that's a problem.
But um if majority rules that's fine.
And and that would suggest that you know we still have the funding we still have the capability of taxes and and casino to take care of our local but you know we need to you know get those people to get the the CRD and other sources to fix the regional uh methodologies options.
So don't forget our taxes go up as the C or D expands too we all pay C or D taxes so keeping that in mind and all the way through uh hey if I'm not the majority so be it that's what we that's what we agreed on I think when we started okay thank you thank you John so I think we're good for D Steph can you take us to the next one so just to confirm investing active transportation infrastructure infrastructure that meets the regional needs yes please E are we good there?
Sorry, Jerry.
You'll you'll vote all next time.
Okay, folks, how do you feel about F?
Okay.
Again.
Any uh any thoughts uh shall we press on?
Thank you.
Sorry, Jerry.
Okay.
How do we feel about this one?
I I think I think it's something that we're doing now kind of anyway, and that, you know, uh the trail widening is a good example.
Right.
That you had put up that the CRD had requested extra money for, but it didn't reach the West Shore at all, or View Royal bordered.
In fact, it stopped, I think, at the View Royal border.
So I think if we were more aligned, and it's not about everybody from View Royal just traveling around View Royal.
Everybody from View Royal is traveling somewhere else through View Royal to get there.
So that that's where my perspective was.
Yeah, exactly.
And and actually thank you, Steph, for raising that.
I think the uh one of the our active transportation reports noted that what eighty-three percent of Fuel residents travel outside uh to other municipalities.
And it's probably just a reflection of how small we are.
Thank you.
I think we can move on so this is question two which is agree neither agree nor disagree or disagree okay okay so i think we're good we'd have got a consensus majority there likewise likewise likewise.
Uh no.
So we we can submit these.
Uh you're just saying, are there any more additions, deletions?
Yeah, I mean, I I looked at this.
These these sticky notes are basically um paraphrasing.
So a lot of councils actually had similar uh comments, equity of influence between smaller versus larger local governments, loss of uh influence, um, loss of power in terms of decisions.
Uh all of these, I mean we could just as easily just add all of them and all of all of your comments in and uh append it.
And see how they stick.
Yep.
Yeah.
Thank you.
So can we go back a screen?
So this one here, um, we had to rank them as one, two, three, four, right?
Uh no, this is uh you um basically checking off what you consider to be a concern.
Uh for example, loss of local control, is that a concern?
And um the market share basically said so.
Um financial implications of resource allocation, all of you said that's a concern.
So I mean, in in summary here, I would say that um if I get my oh I got a pointy thing.
There we go.
So uh the first one, second one, and the fourth one is basically majority.
And then this third one's kind of like a swing, a swing boaty one.
So I mean, uh up to you, Chair, as to how you want to work this.
But um, that's the that's how it was tallied.
So did we have to rank them?
Or you know, can we submit them as the it was all that take all that apply?
They can they can take all this, right yeah they they'll basically collate the check marks and say yeah then then we'll let them do that yeah so just for clarification we'll check all the boxes I guess so to do yeah it is a majority so it is still yeah even yep and like wage same with this this is a majority as well yep okay I will check them all okay now the next one are the rankings and I will warn you there's a lot of numbers, and what I've done is you know, we don't have a normal distribution, and and and Mayor Tobias will probably chastise me when it comes to statistics, so uh especially at this late at night.
But um, what I'm gonna show you is a bunch of numbers, and I'm gonna show you the average of the numbers for each one.
I'm also gonna show you what's called the mode, which is the most common number that was uh that was voted on.
And then there might be some trends associated with that, but because it's not normally distributed, it's uh it's just to give um all of the information as to you know the trends and and what the majority have said.
So here we go.
So for the first one, for example, the average was 2.4, but the mode, so there's an uh an even number of uh first, second, and fourth.
But given that it's 2.4, it's closer towards the number two, if you want to uh um interpret it that way.
When you look at the other three, uh one, three, and four, uh for those those are the most so the most common uh rankings were that and the averages actually uh are fairly close to that so it basically means you know not from a trend because we don't have enough numbers but it does kind of show a strong response to people agreeing that the second point is a one the third point's a three and the fourth point's a four so if we were to go by that then it would be two one three four I think that's right are we good with that?
Perfect.
I like this.
So similar to here, um two, one, and three, they're all quite distributed nicely.
I think we're good for that.
The only one difference is that the average between the first and the third is the same, but the most common rankings is quite clear the first one's a rank two and the third one's a rank three.
Yeah, yeah, agree.
And again, same thing as the last question about any other concerns.
Um I can just put them all on there.
Sounds good.
So back to number one.
Number one, one.
I told you that was the going to be the hardest one.
Yeah.
You're right.
So there we are, guys.
Do we want to uh just uh put that in and it'll let it negate to nothing, or does anyone wish to motivate?
Um I have a question about our comments.
Um are you going to compile our the the final you know the final sheet in the in the questionnaire?
You're gonna compile those and send them in as is.
Every single one of your comments I'll do verbatim.
Okay.
Yes.
And if you do want to add anything additional, now's a good time, especially for this uh for this question.
So on this one, how do you how do you want to proceed?
I would say we do as we've done on the other ones, which is to go with the majority on it.
Don't okay, thank you, committee.
Um at the end of the day the uh the staff recommendation is that the committee um I can't hear my writing here so late can committee recommend the council that staff forward a final council response to the CRD regarding its transportation governance check questionnaire.
Right.
Anyone want to move that I'll move that take it on yeah good there we are all those in favor against carried thank you all.
Move the uh turn it back to the uh chair, Mr.
Bias.
We must have some more agenda items, don't we?
Yes, we could have a larger and uh for that I'd move staff's recommendation.
That we receive uh that it'd be forward to the province, and that the province would be um uh reaching out to work with um various authorities, including the First Nations, to second.
Um I do I do on second thought of this one.
Um I do have concerns with us.
I think if the Songhis at First Nation wish to do that on their own, um they they could do that, but I don't think it's our place to get involved.
I think all that we're doing is is sending a letter to the ministry and and encouraging.
So it it is, you know, and I think the only um hopefully staff would be that we would be reaching out and obviously with consultation and consideration with the First Nations that the ministry would.
But obviously they the province is well into that uh mode of thinking the debate when we last discussed this was about one government asking another government to do another thing.
And so we concluded that perhaps if we encourage the province to do the project, they will have a process that they follow to get it done if they agree.
So we weren't intending that we stipulate any kind of process.
Rather, we recommend that these works get done.
So we've we've removed the CRD from it.
Okay, I'll call the question.
All those in favor?
Opposed.
Okay.
Sorry, Don, what was your vote there?
Uh I voted in favor.
Okay, thank you.
You can go to bed now.
Will we have a closed meeting after?
No, we we uh took care of that already.
Sorry, Don.
Yeah.
Great.
Thanks.
Back to you, Mayor Tobiash.
That's right.
I think we've got uh yeah, we just gotta have our correspondence to deal with second.
We've got a motion to receive and a seconder.
All in favor.
Seeing the hand from Don.
Uh none opposed.
Motion carries.
And we'll go to question period.
Anyone want to ask counsel a question in here?
Please activate the microphone, state your name.
Susan Prescho, and I reside at 285 Palace here.
Um, I had lots of other questions, but I'm gonna hold those for another meeting based on some of the conversations that were had this morning this evening.
But based on the presentation that was done by our um paint painter this afternoon this evening, um, I wanted to give you a little bit of history, but I do have a question at the end.
Uh, and I realize I'm gonna say it now that you probably have information that you're gonna have to um get back to me because I do want an answer on the question, but uh you probably will have to have some more um involvement with staff uh to get the response to the question.
The question is basically um right now I know that there is Grand and Fur that is coming up um for possibility of building with the development that's going to be going up.
Mr.
Painter was talking about noise problems.
I anticipate and have seen that there's a possible potential problem exactly with Grand and Fur.
Right now there's cedars, a cedar wall that is there.
And my understanding is that that cedar wall is going to disappear.
So therefore, we will possibly be sitting here in the future with another noise complaint.
Whereas that maybe that could that be something that would be looked into of maintaining these trees in order to reduce the noise problem potentially happening at Grand and Fur.
And I know you can't answer that because there's probably a lot of information that you need to get from staff.
But my question would be can we save those cedars because they are substantial in terms of depth, height, and all that, that it would protect the floors that are closer to the island highway.
And I would say that if the proposal and anything that happens with the I'm just going to call it boardwalk, it's the island highway presentation that we heard this evening.
If that also is not taken care of, that will be another future problem that we will have to deal with, and residents will have to pay in the future if we don't look into that upfront.
Thank you for your questions.
Okay.
I would like an answer eventually, um, in regards to granted fur because I know that the other one has not been put through at this point.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And I I think it's uh does beg a larger question of noise mitigation in our developments.
And you know, I know I was not on council when uh Cetus Vale was developed, and then an extension was approved, and then the CRD housing went uh up on the other side, and I think that that is, I guess was my concern about um we're we're dealing with more complex stuff.
We're not approving a single house or a townhouse.
And I think noise mitigation, obviously we're hearing is an issue uh and increasingly.
Um these things have an effect on each other.
So I think the question is is um and the presentation by Mr.
Painter tonight is well received, and that we've are encountering things that we didn't expect to see.
Uh I think when it came before council, that wasn't something that was on people's minds as uh it it moved toward the thetus fail development, moved toward the highway, or that the CRD apartment went up to mitigate it.
So thank you again for your question.
Uh Carl, I'll go to you.
Anybody on the phone?
Mayor Tobias, or Mayor Tobias, we've had no callers this evening.
Carl, what are we gonna do to promote ourselves and upper ratings?
Um I think uh opening with a dance routine would help.
Okay.
I'll get Damien to work on his dance routine then.
Um but thank you, uh Carl, for all your work tonight.
And uh uh I think we're past that.
Uh can I get a motion to terminate, please?
Seconded.
Uh and all in favor.
Seeing none opposed.
Motion carries.
Thank you, staff.