Meeting Overview
The Committee of the Whole meeting addressed critical municipal planning, financial, and safety matters, spanning both an afternoon and evening session. Key outcomes included committing to five-year funding for the South Island Prosperity Partnership (SIPP) and advancing a major change to the sewer user fee structure, moving to a fully volumetric, progressive rate system. In the evening, Council debated two significant rezoning applications. The revised plan for 9 Erskine Lane (336 units) was received for information after the developer addressed many prior Council and resident concerns (reduced height, increased amenities, rental covenant). The OCP amendment and rezoning for 298 Island Highway (54 mixed-use units) was also advanced, conditional on resolving traffic logistics and commercial use restrictions. Applications for environmental permits and a dock at 275 Kerwood Street were received, though Council expressed reservations about approving variances given an unresolved conflict regarding an existing boathouse on the property.
Key Decisions
- Council commits to renewing its financial support for SIPP for another five years.
- The Public Safety report for July and August 2020 was received for information.
- Residential Parking Only signs are recommended for installation on the specified stretch of Bessborough Avenue.
- The RCMP media summary for August 2020 was received for information.
- The Capital Project Update report was received for information.
Transcript
2766 segmentsOkay, thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome on this smoky day.
I'd like to begin by acknowledging our friends and neighbors, the Songhees and Esquimalt First Nations.
I have a fairly long meeting intro that I have to read, which is going to be the way of life for the next year probably, so I should probably stop apologizing for it and just get used to it.
This meeting is being held under the auspices of Ministerial Order M192 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the public health officers' orders prohibiting gatherings in excess of 50 people.
This evening we will hear from the public during the public participation and question period portions of the agenda.
So that comes up twice in committee of the whole.
It'll come up very soon in this afternoon.
So if anyone's thinking of calling in to speak to any issue that's on this afternoon's agenda, now would be a good time to get on the phone.
And then it'll also come up in this evening session.
Um, and I think there's probably more items that the public are interested in this evening's um portion of the agenda.
So you to in order to do that, you call 778-402-9227, and when you prompted, you enter the conference ID number that you see on the website, which is 150012433 pound.
And then that gives you access to the meeting.
And at the appropriate time in the agenda, I will then announce the last four digits of your phone number, ask you to mute mute the live webcast to avoid feedback.
Ask you not to use speaker's phone to ensure sound quality, and ask that you unmute yourself by pressing star six.
And if you can just begin by giving us your name and address for the record.
If you're providing comments through the chat feature, that feature is open during the public participation portion of the agenda for your comments and the question period portion of the agenda for your questions to council.
Again, we ask that you provide your name and address to begin your chat feature comments.
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.
Thank you.
Um, I just need to get in here now.
Hopefully, this will cooperate.
So I just need a motion to approve the agenda, please.
Second.
Okay, thank you.
So Alan has asked me to let her know who is moving and seconding because it's difficult, her not in the room.
So that was moved by Councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Lemon.
All in favor.
That's carried.
Um, so we have no minutes.
So we're on to petitions and delegations, and we're welcoming South Island Prosperity Partnership.
Good.
Welcome to the Yep, go ahead.
Oh, okay, you can hear me.
Good.
Hello, everybody.
Good afternoon.
A pleasure to be here with you today.
I I do apologize, my screen sharing isn't working.
So Kieran, who's on the phone with me as well, um, he's on his end operating the slides.
And and I I think you can actually still see me and hear me fine.
Is that right?
Yeah, that's fine.
And and counselor Matson is on the phone so he can hear you.
And counselor um Damien is unfortunately missing, but he is going to watch the presentation later because he'll be able to go on the website and watch the recording of it.
Just yeah.
Well, well, thank you once again for having me here.
Fantastic.
And I just want to mention quickly I'm I'm calling from Esquimalt today, so I'll just begin by acknowledging that I'm lucky enough to live and work on the traditional lands of the Lakwungan people, today known as the Songis in the Esquimalt nations.
So thank you all very much for having me here and the opportunity today to speak about some of our recent progress and next steps.
And it's uh we're just rounding up to the five year mark.
Um, so it's really a nice time to check in before we embark on the next five.
As you know, SIP is an alliance of over 65 public and private sector partners in Greater Victoria, and these include 11 local governments, nine First Nations, three postsecondary institutions, nine industry associations and nonprofits, as well as 30 major employers.
And of course, View Ural was one of our very first 29 founding members, and Mr.
Mayor played a huge and instrumental role in really getting this off the ground.
So we want to thank you for your continued role in shaping our vision and priorities as we move forward.
So we believe that the strength of our organization really lies in the diversity of our members, and we have one of the most diverse regional economic development models in North America.
In fact, we recently won a gold medal from the International Economic Development Council for this collaborative model.
SIP was first established by its members as a region was one of the slowest to rebound from the Great Recession in 2008, 2009.
And at that time, SIP's founders found that Canadian cities of the same size as the South Island were substantially more invested in economic development.
So SIP was created to facilitate and promote the development of a strong, resilient, inclusive, and diversified economy.
In short, a place where we can grow while still protecting our very high quality of life here.
Now, this is just a reminder, I don't want to read every single one of these, but our purpose was enshrined in our constitution and came directly from consultation with our members.
I wanted to just take a moment here.
This slide is actually a work in progress, but it does give you a really good illustration of how our economy is so integrated and central, sorry, and View Royal is deeply embedded within the regional economy.
So I just wanted to show you here an example because that's CGI, and of course, it's not located in View Royal, but you can see that there is a commuter shed that spreads all the way across the peninsula, and that our our area is really like a spider web, a sort of interdependencies, and where we work and where we live are rarely the same place.
So SIP's been in existence now for over four years, and as we approach our fifth year anniversary this March, we wanted to make sure that we're still meeting and hopefully exceeding the expectations and values of our members.
So we initiated an organizational review to examine current strengths and areas for future focus with an independent evaluator.
And this work was overseen by a member driven organizational review committee.
So the evaluator conducted 22 surveys and 19 interviews, and the full results will be available to view to be presented to you at our AGM September 30th.
And so far, there's the general perception that one, SIP is making progress in achieving impact and supporting economic development and awareness in the region.
Two, there is a need for regional economic development coordination and collaboration, and SIP is effectively filling this role.
And three, economic development is a long-term proposition, and many significant outcomes will be measurable only 10 years or out into the future.
So this year, because it's uh coming up to our fifth year anniversary, we wanted to invite all the counselors of the region.
Um, ideally it would have been in person, but um, and short of that, due to the pandemic, uh, we hope we can we can delay the in-person component and have you all together on a digital format.
Um, and Kim Thoreau, the consultant looking at our organizational review, will be available for um for live questions.
I'm just gonna now run through very quickly, um, well, as quickly as possible.
I know you have a full agenda and you're gonna be there um all evening, it sounds like.
So um, I'll move to the next slide, please.
We began with 29 members and have now more than doubled that to 66 members.
Um, and that's thanks to your your founding um vision and leadership.
So thank you again for that.
New businesses attracted.
So, to this end, SIP attracts new companies and key targeted sectors in order to create new high-quality jobs that can contribute positively to the diversity and resilience of our economy.
Uh, so to date, we have attracted seven new businesses, and our rate of attraction, as you can see, is is growing rapidly.
And now that's because on average it takes between seven and 24 months of working with a company to facilitate their relocation.
Another measure we track is job growth through our business attraction efforts and also our trade accelerator clients.
So to date, we have helped develop or create rather 175 direct new jobs.
And this will fall below our original five year forecast of 500 jobs, but it doesn't consider the induced jobs, which equal 718 additional jobs to date.
So the total uh value of these jobs and combined salary is actually over $37 million, which creates significant demand in other sectors like retail, restaurants, professional services, real estate, and construction.
And it's worth a quick side note that as of last June, 75% of our members, so that those are the largest employers of the region, they cited that the shortage of highly skilled labor was their number one top concern for impeding growth.
And they reported chronic labor shortages that are equal to 4% of their total workforce.
So simply put, job creation is quite challenging with a tightly constricted, a sort of tight labor market like the one we have right now.
And although this is shifting a little bit with the pandemic, that's probably topic for future presentation.
But we will certainly be going back to those sort of tight labor conditions in the not so distant future.
This is the other side of the coin.
So we've received very clear direction from our members that to that we need to focus on growing good jobs that are, quote, over the living wage.
And as of 2019, that number was 40,300.
So the average salary of the jobs from our previous slide that we've helped create are on average $87,880 a year.
So we also worked very hard to establish a strong fit with our community.
And an example we're very proud of is Daytan, a Brazilian software company that for the past 10 years has received Best Place to Work in South America certification.
And they initially began by bringing over 15 Brazilian companies or sorry, families, because that culture is such a strong component of their business.
And they plan on hiring over a hundred local employees.
So they're a great example for us of community integration because they they've actually uh it sounds like a cliche, but they've uh they've formed a strong Portuguese community around a Portuguese church and they meet there every week to play soccer and uh have barbecue.
And I I suspect from that photo that was the the feeling of their first first snow that they experienced, which they they sent us that selfie when they when they endured that.
When SIP began, we had uh two First Nation communities, but now we have nine First Nation uh communities as our members.
Uh so that uh what pretty much wildly exceeded our expectations, and we've learned a lot in the process.
SIP was instrumental in getting funding required to create the Songies Innovation Center, which is a co-working space and an incubator for Indigenous entrepreneurs and freelancers.
And the center is growing, as you can see from this graph year over year.
Last November, we also had the first ever Indigenous Prosperity Gathering, and the gathering was a collaborative effort to create dialogue around economic disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities.
And it was actually the first time that the 10 nations had ever gotten together to discuss collaboration on these topics ever.
This is another project that we're involved in.
So for the third year in a row, recognizing the need for more international business exposure for local businesses, we've partnered with the Toronto Board of Trade and the Greater Victoria Chamber of Commerce to introduce this award-winning program to the region.
And it's a free program open to any company in the whole region.
And we've so far put 30 local companies through that product that that program.
We're also working on an abattoir study, which is the development of a business case to create a local abattoir here so that livestock doesn't have to be removed from the region to be processed, only to be returned here to be to be eaten and sold.
So this is an example of an initiative that we were working on prior to the pandemic outbreak, but it's become more important in light of the current pandemic as more of us become very concerned about local supply chain and food sovereignty.
This is coming also on the on the heels now of a provincial study or effort to look at how we can modernize the meat processing that occurs in the province.
And so we'll be playing a role in helping influence that that those regulatory changes.
Finally, I thought I'd also share with you a project that we've just completed with the Squai Malt, as it's something that a number of municipalities have shown a great deal of interest in.
And we'd be happy to come back at any time and present on this, and we'll certainly be presenting it in detail to the Partners Committee.
And we helped create and develop project parameters and work with the external consultants on a customized investment readiness roadmap.
Really, this allows us to see how does local what can you do at the local level and how does that tap into the regional economic development picture.
And we're able to do that to to really be able to make that a much more cost-effective solution um at a sort of neighbor or local or local level.
Canada's Smart Cities Challenge was an opportunity you probably remember for Greater Victoria to become seen as a national innovator.
And we received a $250,000 grant and we were one of 10 finalists in that first ever Canada Smart Cities Challenge for our smart mobility proposal.
And although we didn't get the final prize, the proposal remains relevant and projects will likely be strong candidates for stimulus funding.
In fact just two days ago it the there's been another sort of challenge that's been launched to look at some of these ideas and how they relate now to COVID recovery.
And definitely it's it's um something that we're going to see more of, given that we've just been through a natural disaster of sorts that hasn't impacted our physical infrastructure.
And so stimulus funding, you can expect to see a lot more in the digital infrastructure.
So since the pandemic hit SIP has moved very quickly to launch what we call the Rising Economy Task Force to coordinate a strong local response to the current economic crisis.
The task force is the largest coordinated industry led recovery effort in BC and I'm quite sure Canada.
And our goal is to develop a regional plan that can help accelerate our recovery efforts with a lens around inclusion, sustainability, and resilience.
And so this has been 120 stakeholders involved, and 11 sector-driven committees have been struck, and those represent the drivers of our economy.
And the task force is going to look at recommendations made by these committees.
So those 10 reports, if you haven't seen them, they've been released and they've been already highly influential with the timing of this is two weeks before speech from the throne when Prime Minister Trudeau delivers that speech.
before that period um they've been circulated with very senior um um little senior ministers and policy staff and so on um and are and are really having a big impact and are very timely so i'll give you just some sense of the key traction or progress to date um as i mentioned 120 stakeholders um they produced 10 high quality uh committee reports um and something that um we're getting uh a lot of feedback about how useful these are because there's there's no other community um in canada yet that has can organized to this degree so we to get there we hosted over 50 meetings and workshops um did uh delivered 250 surveys uh this resulted in 39 recommendations and now uh nine recovery themes.
So immediately we're we're moving on a lot of uh quick wins and advocacy priorities um building partnerships.
And the next step is really now developing the regional priorities, and the task force will develop that strategy.
And then that will be presented during Rising Economy Week, which I'll tell you about in just a moment.
So just at a glance, you can see that we are about three quarters of the way through the process here.
And so we've gone the sort of draft wording for a vision, recovery goals, and the prioritization process.
And we're working with MNP who've contributed this in kind as a sponsorship.
And they've done a wonderful job.
And then this will be presented during Rising Economy Week.
Just a few examples of some early traction.
So the committees have actually already been quite active and COVID Safe Verification App is a neat example of something that's really come from the collaboration with the BC government needing to work with some organized industry representatives and done so through the retail services and restaurants committee.
And this app essentially allows you to take your phone, scan like a QR code or and it will later become an app and find out if a an establishment, uh a sort of a restaurant or store, if they are complying with public health office requirements and it's a safe place for customers.
The idea behind this is to really encourage customers to be able to feel very secure in shopping locally.
And so we've had some pretty um pretty good feedback so far about the how that's been progressing.
And so it's something we're we're testing here, piloting and creating here and that will be rolled out to the whole province.
Another example is microcredential training for upskilling displaced workers in digital marketing in this case with the Lacrity Foundation and the BC government.
And so microcredentials is just a fancy way of saying how can you deliver a much shorter way of training people so that in three months as opposed to three years, if they've lost their job in one sector, they can be hired in another sector much, much faster.
So you know no one can take a four-year pause anymore and go get a full new degree or something.
So how do we do that in a more rapid way?
So we're doing quite a bit of work in that in that area given that it's such a huge crisis and challenge for our region and all of Canada.
And then we've received some funding for what we've been doing to take some of these ideas and turn them into fundable proposals from Western diversification, which will be announced actually tomorrow.
To complement our monthly our annual Prosperity index, which is a dashboard that tells us how we're doing year over year as a region.
This is something that we've we've needed to add in a monthly dashboard, like a scorecard to see how much we are actually recovering and be able to take a closer look at that on a monthly basis.
Speakers picking up on all these topics from the Rising Economy Task Force.
We're also partnering with the Pacific Northwest Economic Region to have a track that's broader, allows us to get ideas from outside the region.
And we'll we'll have speakers such as Monique LeRoux, the chair of Canada's Industry Strategy Town Council, which is Canada's sort of think tank looking at the recovery for the Liberal government.
And also locally, Minister Mangal, the Minister of Jobs and Competitiveness and Economic Development.
And lots more.
So if you go to that URL at the bottom, Rising Economy.com, you'll get all the details there.
I won't go through the awards, but I will say that we've been very humbled in just four and a half years of life to be able to be recognized for some of our contribution to economic development, and the people behind it have been in this field for um combined you know decades.
So that's certainly um been uh been something that's been very encouraging for us.
And I'll show you the the small but uh passionate team you have working um on your behalves.
Um and you can see here there there's five of us and some um occasional contractors, but it's not an immense team, um, but certainly one that is very um committed and passionate about this work.
And before I I finish up here, um it's the time of year again, or time of a decade, I suppose, that um we we say that our first five year funding um has come to expire, um, and we want to talk to you about a renewed funding request for five year funding.
And so I'll just mention here to give you a sense that the funding was originally based on the 2011 census and 2016 tax blend.
So we've just updated this now for the 2016 and 2018 years as was agreed upon five years ago.
However, knowing that it's such a tight year, such a difficult year revenue wise, what we'd like to propose is instead of increasing uh funding for a year, we keep it at the current baseline.
And then after that, um just introducing a 2.5% increase, which is um adjusted with uh sort of the average um inflation rate based on CPI for the last five years.
Next slide, please.
Of course, finally, thank you so much for your time right now.
Your commitment and your support and your leadership are tremendous value to the entire region.
And so thank you very much for that.
And of course Mayor Screech's participation with the Partners Committee, which is a highly active group that meets every three weeks and help really help shape quite a lot of this and keeps us all very um engaged.
So thank you very much for that.
And that's it.
I hope you have a few questions if I can see help.
I suspect there'll be some questions.
Um Councillor Rogers.
Yeah, thank you very much for your presentation.
It's uh great to get a um a catch up on on all what's going on, particularly with the the COVID uh uh pandemic.
And uh I'm really appreciating the uh the task force and and the recovery efforts that um uh that your organization is undertaking.
Um so um um just catch me up on this um the rising economy week um that you're gonna have on uh what November the 16th.
How does one um uh is it a virtual conference that's uh via Zoom?
Yeah, so it'll be a virtual conference via Zoom or something very similar to Zoom.
Um it will be free.
There'll be what we call a digital main stage.
So somewhere, you know, every day we'll send you an email that says this is the lineup for today.
Um if you can't make a part of the day, but you want to catch up, that'll be available on the website right away.
So you can sort of pick and choose what speaks to you the most and catch up and then jump back in.
So it'll be a combination of panels where you can do live QA.
There'll also be workshops.
There'll be one designed targeted at municipal, municipal governments, how you can also do your part to prepare sort of for the um what you call you know economic recovery.
And we'll do that with, we'll co-host that with MNP.
So really a whole variety of pieces.
We'll do some live broadcasts, um likely front with a local um uh like well just say it uh likely with check, but that hasn't been confirmed um and uh so we're trying to kind of make sure it's a little bit varied so we don't we don't bore people um with um with one format uh another question thank you um your prior to covet uh there was all the uh the concerns regional concerns of uh of climate action and um the the critical emergencies um arising from that we certainly see that uh happening in in california uh today even though the president may not think so um so can you uh update us on on how um uh your organization is is working to uh address that through economic um recoveries and and strategies yeah that's an excellent question um so a big a big part of the recovery strategy is looking at the lens of resilience um and resilience um is has an environment strong environmental component to it so so that's definitely a lens for the the task force um the task force to deliver to identify the priorities for economic recovery uh so that that's one place where um you'll you'll see it we're also actually covering some of that topic too during rising economy week uh there'll be a a keynote or a panel on the green recovery.
Um and um i agree anyways you're absolutely right we're um this is a topic that's um it's it's important for it to be not a left or right wing topic but uh it's an economic development it should be I think a fundamental um reality for all of us thank you counselor hi Emily no I don't have any questions I just I just um wanted to a thank you very much for your presentation and say when your your smart city um project and entry was so smart you had it yeah I I I trust that hasn't, you know, changed your focus.
I I certainly there was a climate action um emphasis in that.
And uh anyway, good work.
Thank you very much.
Oh, thank you so much.
Yeah, no, we we haven't um dropped that or anything.
So we're um uh there's quite a lot of recommendations on the Transportation and uh travel committee that that that speak to that.
But also I think I I have quite a lot of hope for the new um the new uh grant uh that's been opened up as of yesterday.
Um and then also we've been doing a microtransit study um um and we're we had to pause a little bit to see how do we contextualize it for the current pandemic.
Um and and then we'll be looking at the next steps there.
But but thank you.
Yeah, we thought it was very smart too.
Counselor Madsen, did you have any questions?
I'm good at this time, thank you.
Appreciate your uh presentation.
I'll have a better look at it once I uh see it online, but thank you.
Okay, it is in your package as well, right?
If if you click on the presentation, the the slides are all there.
I just discovered that, that's why I'm telling everyone.
I checked earlier and it wasn't there, so maybe I'll I know the one question from the counselor who's absent would be so I'm going to ask it.
You know I'm highly supportive, but the could the question would be tell me how View Royal benefits from this exactly.
Right.
Well, I I I think my my couple ways to answer that.
Yeah, go ahead.
Were you gonna say something?
I was just gonna say, I mean, your presentation does largely, but if you can just expand on it if you can briefly, I think that would be helpful.
Yeah, absolutely.
So I mean, number one, um, if we were to to do the research in terms of View Royal, where people um derive in in their working age where they derive their income, um probably safe to say like eighty percent of residents um um find uh jobs in in in the working age group.
Um in the workforce, they they don't work in View Royal.
Um so so you know anything we do regionally, we're all very interdependent.
That's that's kind of like the the the big picture is that uh we can't we can't do it on our own.
Um and so I think that having a healthy economy that and fostering that environment over the next decade really is is something that we all need to need to be doing.
But also I um I think the other part of that is that um there's there's so many opportunities that we can't take advantage of when when we're um when we're siloed from one another.
So just you know smart cities to be an example of you know wouldn't have happened um without that that's a regional point of view that is all pulling together.
And and as we go through the the rising economy uh task force work and the strategy and so on, you know we just are are not going to get that kind of traction with um um federal government, provincial government and so on um without that that unified vision so it's tremendously powerful i i that's my that's my second answer okay thank you thank you very much counselor rogers has another question uh too just bouncing off of um uh the previous one how are you doing in terms of getting the other two municipalities on board so it can be completely regional yeah that's a good that's a good question so Langford um uh we've continued we've never given up and so every year we we knock on the door again and and see if we can can um drive you know the the point home um uh so we haven't had luck to be honest in in Langford and and I think that that's sort of a standard um reaction in that municipality I think that's fair to say um they don't do a lot of the things collaboratively um regionally uh but we'll keep trying um and then uh Mitchosin is one where um we've been told you know there might be some changes um in terms of the composition of that council in the coming years and that there would be more appetite um for it but I do believe that the the mayor is is um would be in favor of it that's um those are that's sort of where we are but we're pleased to have souk down having having joined us the positive spin is that we've gone from 10 to 11.
Yeah, yes and and nine nations where we only had two before nations which is pretty remarkable so we're we're closer to 13 than we used to be.
Yeah.
Thank you for coming.
And we will um we'll get a motion of some sort for you fairly soon so that you you you have that moving forward.
Um yeah.
And I just want to again thank you all for what you're doing right now.
This is a is an I'm I hate using the word unprecedented, but just such an uh a time that no one has prepared for.
So everything you do is so vital and important to keep um things moving along for for all of us here.
So so thank you on behalf of SIP as well.
You're welcome.
Thanks very much.
Okay.
Have a good day.
Thanks.
Well, I mean, I think if if you if we're prepared to make it, I mean it's it's just status quo for the budget, right?
Okay.
Then the money is already in the budget.
Yeah, and I I think it's quite important for this.
Well, I think if you want to make a motion that this move that um continue to support for uh the next fiscal year.
Well, they're looking for the five years of commitment again, right?
Five years.
That's what they're looking for.
Is that the five years only steady?
Well, going up the just the the 2.5% per year.
Yeah.
So we've we haven't gone up at all in the first five years.
But this five years we will go up the 2.5% per year.
Yeah.
But they really do need in terms of any planning work, they need that five-year commitment, which is what we gave them in the first place.
Okay.
So just okay.
Second.
So that's on the floor that committee recommend to councillors moved by councillor Rogers and seconded by Councillor Lemmon that we commit to the five years of support for SIBS.
So I'll call the question.
Councillor Matson, you all right with that?
He's fallen asleep.
So I'll call the question all in favor.
Thanks, everyone.
I think it really their work really is remarkable.
Um, and I think it's it's well worth continuing to support.
Good.
So now we go to public participation.
Is there anyone on the chat function or on the telephone?
Your worship, I do not have any callers at this time.
Okay.
Thank you.
So I think we'll we'll carry right on through.
And I will turn the chair over to um Councillor Lemmon for Protective Services.
Thank you, Your Worship.
Um, I have a chair's report.
I have except to um to acknowledge all the men and women working within this file under such extraordinary um circumstances and the the the the courage and um I can't imagine I can't imagine being a a um firefighter or a police officer dealing with so much that is so um so new to us and so much is so unwelcome uh so i just hats off salute you um no business arriving from previous minutes that i know of anyone know of any business no and uh so public safety report for july do do we have um acting director marshall on the line or we do.
Yes, ma'am.
I am here.
Hi.
Thank you.
Where is he?
Where are you?
We can't we can't see.
I think i might need to speak for my picture to come up on the screen, maybe.
Oh there you are.
There you go.
There we go.
Perfect.
So did you want to speak to this report?
Um the the report is just a quick snapshot of what's been going on within the protective services division for the summer, basically July and August.
Um, some main things we've been focusing on.
One um of our priorities has been um vacations and breaks for staff and our membership as we uh look for look towards a uh possible second wave coming in the fall.
So just ensuring that everybody's rejuvenated and ready to go for that.
Um we've introduced a couple new programs as well.
We now have a self-inspection model for low hazard businesses, um, which allows us for for businesses that have a low hazard and they haven't been a problem in history, no code violations, that type of thing, being able to have an online version of a self-fire inspection.
We've had positive results so far with that.
As well noted in there is our operations division has implemented a new format for our drills on Thursday night.
We have broken our three main stations that we do up into six, which adheres to our COVID requirements for less than six people per group, as well as encouraging the social distancing as much as we can while we still maintain our required training.
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Any questions?
Counselor Rogers.
Yes, thank you.
So in in terms of the training, is that uh through the GII?
Are they able to provide those services still?
Um we're finding that the the large scale organizations like the Justice Institute or even our our um Vancouver Island Emergency College up in Nanaimo, they haven't quite yet continued with in person classing.
We still have a lot of uh online courses available, but our our reformat of our our drills was mainly for the volunteer membership and staff for every Thursday night.
So it's more of a skills maintenance um drill issue.
Can I ask other questions as well?
So how how are you doing in terms of the numbers of members, volunteer members?
I believe right now the office division is looking at having a uh recruitment drive coming up uh this fall.
Um right now, I believe we're sitting at just over 30 members.
Uh we have a probationary class of six that have just completed their uh, I believe they came in right at the beginning of COVID, so they're kind of uh right in the middle towards the end of their uh training processes, but at this point we're doing uh relatively well.
Okay, that's great.
Uh you know, the challenges of of COVID, um, you know, it was interesting, compounded by uh the the forest fire event on Mill Hill and most recently uh OK Tire.
Uh you know, uh a huge uh commendations to um to the department to being able uh to participate and address those matters.
Uh do you care to uh speak on those at all?
I think especially with uh those last two incidents that you spoke to really shows the work that the department has done with its uh regional partners with regards to Colwood Fire and Lankford fire.
Uh we found that uh both of those incidents, I don't want to say they were seamless, but um the way that the departments uh work together, the way that we had results, I think we're both extremely positive.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Okay.
I don't have a question, but Rob, I just wanted to say I I said to CAO Anima yesterday when I was chatting with him that I thought we were remiss in not um acknowledging International Firefighter Day on Sunday.
You know, it seemed like other municipalities were doing something to acknowledge it.
And so um just I just want to convey that, and next year we'll make sure that we do acknowledge it in some sense, because council I think should should acknowledge that that type of event.
Thank you, your worship.
Thanks.
And I just have a question, Rob, and that is um there's to to thank the firefighters and welcome the new recruits and so on.
There's an annual banquet.
Um, how are we going to acknowledge the troops this year?
Or can we?
Yeah, it's a very interesting question.
I think what uh we will be working on when the chief gets back from his holidays is looking at uh what possibilities you know what we can do to be able to get the same results, you know, to as you said, the welcome the new members.
We do have several members that are reaching some milestones within their careers, i.e., 20-year medals, or we even have a 35-year medal.
Um it's gonna be challenging, um, but I think we should be able to come up with something that will at least show our appreciation and our honor to these members.
Okay, thanks very much.
Um, motion to a seat?
I do have a question.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Oh, there you are.
It's not all about me.
I know, I know.
So, Rob, uh thanks for your uh for the report and your presentation.
I want to know are there any uh issues or concerns that uh we should you should you'd like to bring to our attention?
What keeps you up at night?
I don't know if there's any uh major issues or concerns that we really have at this time.
Um the only thing of note that's really changed for us was actually our dispatch protocols with regards to um BC ambulance have changed.
They actually changed this morning at 11 AM.
We are now being called to I don't want to say a normal level of calls, but we're somewhat back to a normal level.
Um we've been included in the the red category now, so we do go to purples and reds.
Whereas prior to this with COVID 19, we are only going to purple calls.
Uh follow up question Do we have an option on attending those or can my understanding was you were just going to the the more major ones yes now we we do you're correct we do have a um an option on those and that we have been in conversation with chief hearst um we did actually just recently get a proof of life from uh grand fork so we slowly make it his way back home um we will be meeting with our chief officers uh next week to to look at this and see what type of ramifications this could have for the membership um call wise and what we could anticipate going forward into this possible second wave okay and one last question on this what does there any negative impacts to our residents from not attending these lower level calls not that I'm aware of yeah I I I would think that uh I mean there's some hard stats that came out through BC ambulance and the government about you know how effective uh fire departments response were to certain type of calls I mean you know do we have a an overall effect in the the medical outcome but I think what might get missed in that portion uh is the uh the emotional end you know our residents looking after our people um so that will be something that will be discussed when the chief comes back and we'll we'll look at that kind of holistically on how we feel best suits the department and our community.
Okay thank you very much.
Okay.
All right so we have a motion to receive do we have a seconder yeah it's move moved by councillor rogers seconded by myself okay yeah all in favor councillor mattson is that anything yeah he's that yes yeah so just assume that I'm in favor unless I say not all right done okay uh motions passed why don't we turn change it around and let um why don't we talk talk go okay who's who's gonna be speaking to um probably Kim to the best bearer okay so why don't why don't we why don't we thank you, Acting Director marshall.
Appreciate it.
And here we have in person, Inspector preston of the West Shore RCNP.
Welcome, sir.
Thank you very much.
Just a note I saw it fit to be here.
I noticed Chief Hurst did not see it fit to be here.
He's not.
He's in Grammar.
I know.
I know.
I knew this meeting.
I wouldn't take holidays during this meeting.
He didn't have the same uh dedication.
Just throwing it out there.
He would do the same if I wasn't here, and you know it.
All right.
Well, it's been a while here since uh had the pleasure of uh addressing Mr.
Barron Council, so thank you for having me.
Um I'll just go over some stats for the summer, July and August, uh mainly, and then we can talk about uh anything else you wish.
Um we did an overview just to kind of give a uh a broad based uh overview for the constituents of the west shore and in august and we recently broke down all the statistics of all the calls that we went to so we went over to it was just over 2000 calls uh in august which is um it close to similar to where we were last year despite covet um so we're pretty much uh on pace of last year uh of note though uh of concern was the fact that the mental health calls had had uh jumped up so much i think it was 60 percent to 135 calls or something on those lines uh just for and as well as some well-being checks on top of that so um there is some concern i i have no doubt that COVID somehow is contributing to uh you know the wellness, the mental wellness of of a lot of people.
I think uh all of us have been affected somehow, and obviously some uh some more than others.
So uh those that's one of the things that uh we're really trying to focus on and trying to see how we can better address those types of uh files with our partners.
Um I'll just go over some of the uh some of the the bigger files and some of the more high-profile uh incidents that we've been dealing with over the last number of months.
Um in general here, we had a $30,000 recovery of stolen property by our crime reduction unit.
That's our property crime unit.
Um, and a uh they executed a warrant on a storage unit in Sanich, and the majority of the property has been returned off to uh to the owners.
It's a 52-year-old male who was arrested.
Um, and this individual was absolutely going around to all the construction sites stealing.
Uh he was not selected or not uh particular where he was going, but there was stuff missing from everywhere found in this.
It was it was incredible how much uh property they actually recovered from this unit.
He was a professional thief.
So I'm happy to say that he was in custody and is awaiting trial.
Um we also did a year-long complex drug investigation where five uh five suspects uh in a multi jurisdictional uh drug trafficking ring have been arrested.
Uh we executed three search warrants on two residences and one business.
And we searched the properties in Langford, Shaunigan Lake, and Duncan.
Vast uh amounts of evidence, including 90 grams of suspected cocaine, a prohibited uh modified handgun uh found loaded and unsafely stored in the residence.
Four replica handguns and other prohibited weapons, brass knuckles and switchblades were also uh located.
So that was some good work from there.
Um, in terms of uh, oh, actually, and uh, because I had the pleasure of going out with the bike unit uh for a shift there for a couple hours and uh saw first down how valuable they're within an hour and a half.
We had two separate individuals arrested, one in Langford at the bus stop at the station nav and one in um Callwood, um, one on warrants and uh possession of drugs, and the other one on warrants and a $3,500 stolen bike that uh he had no knowledge of how it got there.
And so we were able to recover that.
So it was uh it was actually really good for me to go out there and just see how uh what an impact that they have and how quickly and how many how much contact they have on the trails.
And we came all the way out uh to View Royal and and traveled the whole area here.
And uh yeah, it was it was pretty impressive.
Um we uh stepped up enhanced summer patrols through the Theatus Lake, um Woody's Lagoon and Matheson Lake uh throughout the summer there.
And I think our attendance there uh was appreciated by many of the constituents.
Um our crew unit, our our property crime unit was also on July 7th.
We identified a um a male suspect in a string of thefts from shoppers drug marts.
And I don't know if you remember that.
There was two females that uh we'd identified on camera stealing high, high-end perfumes, and they were just literally walking in on the shelves and and going like this into a bag and walking out.
And they it's actually turned out that it was a a cross a cross-country organized crime ring.
And thankfully, uh the good the good work that the members did here was able to link it to uh York Regional Police.
And it was actually an overseas thing where they were going across the whole country stealing this, sticking the stuff in UPS boxes, shipping it to York, and it looked like a warehouse full of stolen uh perfumes, colognes, all sorts of uh high-end products from all these shoppers and and pharmacies.
And then they were shipping them overseas to uh for sale.
And it was a quarter million dollars worth of uh stolen property that was recovered.
So, you know, in terms of small business, that's a that's a huge hit when somebody walks into somebody's store.
Like I'm sure, Mr.
Barry, you could probably appreciate when somebody would walk into a small business and steal that much.
Uh it was it was incredible.
And they're not uh they're not uh Canadian citizens, uh the ones that uh from my understanding, they actually just came over here and um landed immigrant status.
So, anyways, that was uh that was a good um 13 people have been arrested, $67,000 cash was recovered, and a quarter million dollars in stolen property.
Um and as I mentioned, yeah, we went uh from just back to the mental health calls here.
I have the stats here.
We went from last year uh mental health calls from 84 last year to 134 this year, and we also went from 53 well-being checks to 93 um well-being checks.
So a significant increase as you can see.
Um I'll just go through each community here.
Um I know what's uh I always like to kind of give a broad overview of what's happening in all of West Shore, and then I'll focus in on exactly what's going on in uh View Royal here.
Uh Langford, we had a bit uh Bitcoin fraud, and that's something that uh hopefully some of the seniors here can be aware of and and uh mindful of.
We actually had somebody call an impersonated police officer and um told the individual that they were in trouble, that their social security or social insurance was being used, and the only way they could get out of this is paying ten thousand dollars.
And they actually picked the individual up and took them down to the bank where they um which took out ten thousand dollars, is my understanding.
And we we haven't uh we haven't solved that one yet, but we're still working on it.
But it's something that obviously they prey on vulnerable uh seniors and people with perhaps some capacity issues.
Um we had uh emergency response call.
Uh our uh our ERT team was called out to a uh arrest an armed and barricaded male uh suspect who is uh in on the 1700 block of Falcon Heights.
The uh people come home to realize that somebody had broken into their home.
We brought out a full package of Earth crisis negotiators and the dogs, and uh we were able to safely apprehend the individual, the 28-year-old male who was in a possession of a crossbow and had a lifetime ban from weapons.
Um in terms of um we had some robberies.
Uh we had two reports of similar style robberies where a suspect approached uh male victims walking alone at night and demanded their wallets.
Uh one was a completed robbery where the male actually gave the wallet to the individual, and this individual was riding around on a BMX bike on the trails.
And again, I think that speaks back to the importance of having a bike patrol on the uh on the trails to make people feel safe.
And and um, yeah, one was near uh Superstore and one was near Pete Road.
We also had a dangerous uh driver pulled over uh driving down Humpback Road.
Uh he was prohibited from driving province wide, breaching several court conditions, imposed curfews, weapons.
Um we located two shotguns, one of which is uh sawed off, and uh that individual is obviously uh taken into custody as well.
Um we had windows being smashed out of elementary schools uh at uh David Cameron Elementary, and that was in Callwood.
We had uh a break and enter uh suspect we caught on a construction site at 320 Gold Stream.
The security company uh notified us, and we were able to apprehend a 40-year old male at that time.
August 9th, we also arrested an individual uh after the uh monitoring company advised if a male had broken into another construction company in 1913.
Suk rode, a 33-year-old male had been arrested at that time.
He also was in possession of weapons dangerous to public, breach public uh probation order, possession of a controlled substance, and he's carrying a backpack with narcotics, torches, brass knuckles, and a collapsible baton.
Um in Callwood, we actually had a third attempted robbery on foot uh across the uh the bridge from the Galloping Goose near Belmont and uh Cooper arrested at that time was in possession of private games probably reached public we got a glitch um yeah we didn't we didn't apprehend that suspect at that time in terms of uh view royal unfortunately we had a 32-year-old uh female that drowned in Matheson Lake there an RCMP uh officer and an off-duty Oak Bay police officer and a sandwich firefighter performed uh CPR the death wasn't suspicious we went to 36 calls for service uh over the summer there in Highlands so we went to 80 calls in the First Nations and as it uh relates to View Royal on July 9th uh well, first of all, we had uh 302 calls for service uh in in the month of August alone in uh View Royal in July, we had uh July 9th, we had a male masturbating on a public transit bus.
Witnesses kept an eye on the suspect and we were able to point him out to uh they were able to point him out.
A 50-year-old uh uh Patrick Clooney has been arrested and charged with an indecent act.
Uh we had three suspects uh uh arrested in uh on Norquay.
We uh continue to deal with Norquay, and uh it's uh kind of an endless fight here.
But uh we did arrest uh three people July 18th.
Uh we executed a search warrant.
Um received we seized 80 grams of uh suspected cocaine and crack cocaine, a replica long gun, a thousand dollars in cash, and a vehicle uh believed to be used for the drug trafficking out of that residence.
And we continue on that.
On August 16th, we arrested uh an individual for arson uh who was suspected of uh lighting bushfire on the galloping goose trail in View Royal.
Fire Department was quickly on scene and was able to put that out.
Thankfully, the 17-year-old male was arrested and charged with mischief at that time.
August 21st, Victoria General Hospital Protective Services called that a uh a patient had left the hospital driving away, drifting and spinning his wheels in the parking lot, blew through a stop sign.
The vehicle was located and towed for driving without due care and attention.
We also had a uh 20 August 22nd, we had a female passed out in the driver's seat of a car near the 1500 blocks of Admiral's Road.
A drug test uh was completed with poor results.
The individual was charged with impaired driving and refusal to provide a uh a drug demand.
So we had a lot of calls uh throughout the summer there for uh traffic related.
In fact, we had 108 complaints of uh traffic related uh issues.
Most of them were complaints of speeding, uh erratic driving, and uh a number with uh driving without licenses and a few collisions.
Uh the high complaint areas were the island highway number one, island highway and six mile, island highway helmkin off uh off ramp, and the island highway admirals.
We wrote uh as such, I promised you last time that we would do step up our traffic enforcement.
We wrote 66 tickets in uh July and August.
We issued 22 actual tickets and 44 warnings.
And I've I you know instructed our uh traffic unit to use some obvious discretion that we don't need to always write people tickets.
And in this case, here we wrote one third of the people that we pulled over for uh offenses tickets, and two-thirds we gave um some direction and some um just a little softer approach.
Um we also had uh 26 files of uh um from July 1st to um today of loud parties, and most of those are teams playing music and construction noise.
So that's kind of an overview or snapshot of where we've been.
Um it's been a busy summer, and obviously with COVID, we've uh we've had to take different approaches.
We have tried to show a lot more visibility.
Uh initially there right off the bat, we were showing a lot of visibility outside of um uh pharmacies and grocery stores, liquor stores.
There seems to be quite a few thefts.
People were fairly desperate we have stepped that back up in anticipation of a second wave here we are trying to make uh contingency plans at the detachment to make sure that should we have a breakout that we have um appropriate resources so what we're doing is we're keeping uh members we're trying to segregate them onto the three floors of the detachment keeping them away from each other and we have a vigorous um cleaning process going on at the detachment to make sure that we can provide services to you and despite COVID.
I open it up to you thank you very much questions counselor rogers?
I'm not sure.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Sure.
Well, no, it's um first we I wanted to thank you for thetis.
Um, I think that was great to see, and we got good feedback from it, and hopefully we can maybe make that an annual, you know, to have one or two weekends or something where there's a high profile and um but I think it helps.
I'm curious with courts and people being in custody right now.
And what's happening when you're arresting someone on BE, which is obviously the because I'm hearing a lot of stories that obviously the the jails aren't wanting to take people because they have to put them into a 14-day quarantine.
So that people are being released on a basically a promise to appear somewhere down the road, and there's not even a date on that promise to appear.
Well, there would be a date.
We can't release them without a a date, but there is uh a lot of files have been uh stayed because of court time because it's not in the public interest because of COVID.
The more serious ones there we continue to um apprehend and and they are um remanding those individuals on the I I'm not completely sure of the uh corrections process but um there is certainly more apt to release people back into uh the community while this is going on especially at the onset of this and I can only imagine if we have a another big wave of COVID I mean we're a little more sheltered here on the island, but still um the correctional facilities aren't just on the island, obviously.
There are a lot of them are across the pond there.
So it is uh it is an issue.
Right.
Yeah, for sure.
Yeah, okay.
Thank you.
And the other question was just with island outfitters moving to View Royal, which you you may or may not have heard, but I've had they're moving where the Madman McCays used to be up by the Burger King.
Yeah.
Um, and I've had three people contact me now about how View Royal could ever allow a business that sells assault rifles to come into our municipality.
And and my my standard answer is just is saying that as far as I know, that that assault rifles are actually illegal now in Canada.
Um and they may well be selling hunting rifles.
I suspect you're correct.
Yeah.
Yeah, carbines, uh many of the the weapons have recently, as you know, been banned in this country.
Yeah, I mean it's I think all semi-automatic assault rifles have been banned.
But there's been there's a huge list of what they came out with, and and you'd have to be uh very much a gun enthusiast to to actually understand uh many of the guns that I I'm not a gun enthusiast, but uh no, I don't think we have to worry about that concern.
You know, and the concern where you see down in the states all the assault rifles on the wall and people coming in and uh buying uh I don't think that uh I I don't envision that in uh in View Royal or Island Outfitters, uh that's for certain.
Yeah, okay.
Good.
Thank you.
John, yes, um great to see you again.
Um you know E when you you talk about um the uh the issues with with COVID and and I'm wondering about um well uh domestic violence.
Is is that file up?
Are the number of instances domestic violence with the the COVID um you know what I belie I I don't know that offhand.
I know initially we were we were going to quite a few right off the bat and maybe people were just getting used to spending more time with each other.
Um but uh I don't have the the exact stats for you right now if our domestics are up or down correct.
Okay.
I mean we we go to we certainly go to a handful a day uh domestics every day.
Um I look on the pass on sheet and I'd I'd be shocked if uh there's not a domestic on pretty much ever every sheet every day and that's twice a day.
Yeah.
And then of course um uh the the province is um dealing with the other pandemic, you know, the drug deaths, you know.
And um I'm sure that's same situation um in the region and in the West Shore.
Um and all the more reason and congratulations for the work that you're doing to um uh you know to try and catch and deal with the the traffickers.
And I know that um the the residents in Norquay were so frustrated but fortunately with a neighborhood watch uh they've kept uh very good records for you folks um on who's coming and who's going.
And and um uh I think they have direct links to our uh investigators there.
So they have their cell numbers, I think, and uh I think they're in regular contact.
There's a mutual uh interest uh making that problem go away.
One of the interesting things coming from that though is um uh once the individuals that were coming to pick up um the merchandise, they got uh became aware that uh you guys are aware of license plates and so forth, and now they started using taxis.
Um what's what's the uh the police response to that on on how we can uh helpfully hopefully curtail that.
Well, there is there is sometimes we'll we'll say uh I know that they were looking into whether or not they could work with the cab companies, and they have, I guess, apparently done that in the past where they say they won't deliver people to a certain address because they're private companies and they don't have to.
The other thing is that you know, in terms of us writing warrants, short trips in a cab to and from a uh location is a telltale that it's drug trafficking and residence.
That only that only bolsters our uh our grounds for another search warrant.
In fact, it it it couldn't be any easier when you see short trips in a cab to a resident there back, and there's no, you know, when we run that and there's no business, uh legitimate business um license for that residence.
We you know that's one of the things we always check.
You know, are they running a flower shop or they're running something out of there that would justify short trips to a resident?
And in this particular case, obviously that's not the case.
So uh I would suggest that if that continues to be, you know, to happen, um, that will result in probably another uh another search warrant.
I know that the members were also parking police cars, writing files up right outside the residence.
And uh it was amazing how many cars would come and slow down, but they decided it wasn't a good idea to stop tonight.
And they're and your your point's well taken um you know taxi companies uh have a responsibility in the community as well and and I'm sure there I know there's some certain places in Vancouver they won't go to and and um maybe that's just letting letting those folks know.
Um a couple of other questions um our place Talcott, um the uh the facility there.
Um and uh and the mayor's point about um whether or not institutions are uh how they're addressing with the COVID uh situation.
Do we have any ice sense of what's what's going on at our place?
I don't uh I don't know that, but I do know that that's the whole reason that in Victoria having those types of facilities uh dramatically the capacity dramatically reduced or actually shut down.
That's the whole reason that they're allowing um camping anywhere that you can find um grass, essentially.
And uh there's very few people in there.
That that's my understanding, right?
That there's maybe seven, eight, nine people in there.
Yeah, well, what we do, you know, it'll be interesting to see what happens when the rain starts coming.
Um yeah, it'll be interesting to see what the province's response is um to that and how they're what they're going to do.
Okay, and I and I guess an editorial comment, um, um, I'm sure the your members are just as frustrated if the courts are uh busily um and and crowns are feeling that they they have to stay the files.
Um what's the message to the offenders?
Um a little inconvenience to go to court, um, no consequence.
I'm back in business.
It's uh it's it is very frustrating, you know.
A lot of the breaches and you know, because we and that's one thing we pride ourselves here in the West Shore is we've got uh we're very diligent when someone put people on conditions or we're in the court imposed conditions, we make sure that we go to their residences, and that's why a lot of them the offenders we've had great success in in moving them along out of the West Shore, uh, because they know that they're gonna get vigorously checked um two or three times a day.
We're gonna make sure that you're adhering to your conditions.
Um but unfortunately, a lot of the times that we reach those conditions at this point, there's just no uh no will or capacity to uh to pursue the actual charge legally.
So it uh you're right, it it's an inconvenience to them, but it's uh it's equally um frustrating for you and me.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Uh Counselor Matson, any questions?
Yes, thank you.
I had a couple of questions.
Uh, first, regarding the your participating with the bike patrol, did the uh patrol have to um hook you up with uh an electric bike or something else so you could keep up?
You know what?
I I funny enough, we actually do have two e-bikes and that was one of the conditions uh that I that I got to ride one 'cause those those guys are like billy goats and uh I unfortunately sit behind a desk.
So we'll keep having you and me though.
That's a planted question.
Yeah.
Okay, thank you.
Uh my my other question is and you know, with everything going down in the states to s and and I guess even back east in Canada to the calls for defunding the police and and then when they try to sort of restate that as you know, it'd be more appropriate for uh mental health workers to attend some of these calls.
I'm I'm just wondering in terms of the big increase in mental health calls and well-being checks, um like is there any sort of long-term plans to sort of try to pass that on to the healthcare system?
I'm not saying we should defund you because you have lots to do, but uh or or is there a percentage of those that that would be better off looked at by you know mental health workers or social workers or something?
Yeah, that's a and that's a great question.
Um I've I feel that it many a times here already.
And um, yeah, I mean, obviously, I in fact I'm meeting with uh um Brenda Butterworth Carr here on Friday, and I'd like you know, I'm gonna ask her the same question that you just asked me is is is there gonna be additional resources?
I think the RCNP is asking that.
Um, you know, when I joined uh 23 years ago, the the amount of calls that I would go to in terms of mental health was an absolute fraction of the calls that uh we have today.
Um yet we essentially wear a different hat today and you're essentially uh asked to be a jack of all trades.
We're not doctors we're not physicians we're not nurses we're not mental health practitioners but we're the last line of defense we're the last person that people call when when they can't deal with you know certain situations or certain people um I welcome uh any additional resources I would love to have uh we we do have IMSERT which helps us um but there's such a you know, it's the capacity for them is so small.
Um we just yeah, we'd love to see some more some more mental health uh you know partnerships.
Uh I'd love to be able to have uh regular doctors, physicians, nurse practitioners that we bring the same people to and they get released 15 minutes later.
We wait at the hospital for two, three hours only for them to be released 15 minutes later.
Uh, you know, and that's one of the other things.
And I'm I'm actually compiling a list of all the hours from all the municipalities.
Uh Sanage sent me their hours.
I'm waiting for uh Dell to send me his hours, and I'm gonna show that to the province.
This is how much it's cost our municipalities in policing essentially to be security guards after an apprehension when we wait at the hospital.
Wouldn't it be better served to have in this in this particular region?
It's not a one-size-fits-all, but wouldn't it be better to have a number of, you know, four doctors that this is all they deal with with the same people, so they can they can actually get a scope of what they're dealing with in terms of hey, I know this person here, I know what medications are, I know the risks involved in this individual, and they can do proper assessments and and hopefully find proper treatment for them instead of we go to the eMERGE where they're you know, no for no pun, they're hemorrhaging over there with uh with clients, and you know, they only have so much capacity as well.
So, yeah, these are all things that we we need to work on.
It's gonna take some resources, and I think it's uh I mean these are provincial resources that we're gonna be asking for, uh provincial help.
But we can't do it alone.
Um, you know, in terms of the defunding, I've I've actually uh this I went to callwood uh Erbachosen yesterday, I've talked with Callwood and Langford.
Um they all said, you know, obviously they're not interested in defunding, and I know we've got lots of support from from V Royal as well.
Uh so I don't think uh we're in the same situation as perhaps uh Victoria and Edmonton and some of these other large Toronto, uh these other municipalities that they're gonna take uh from their policing and put into um other areas.
I think we could use some help uh to complement what we've got right now, but uh that's kind of where we're at right now in terms of of resource levels.
Oh thank you.
Just do you just keep us sort of apprised of the discussions and if there's sort of any progress made that way in terms of getting either support from the pro from the province or uh yeah.
Yeah, 100%.
It's and it at some point here uh you know it's gonna become incapacitating to the police here.
When you deal with, you know, 130, whatever I said there in in August, uh when your detachment's dealing with 134 mental health calls and and 93 well-being checks.
Um you know, I don't know that that's what uh was envisioned when you're when you're hiring police is to really move off of into the mental health field like that.
And and it's it's you know brutally expensive at 180,000 dollars or whatever for you, I think it's about 160,000 dollars a year for a police officer I'm not saying that we don't need these people don't need the help or we don't need the resources it's just that's expensive resources.
My I guess my last question in terms of this would be do you have some suggestions for us like um would this be something you know that maybe all the municipalities could you know get other municipalities to write uh to the province or you know point or if we could have some stats we could point out the issue and we could you know then lobby the province or or others for this I'm absolutely not sure what the best course of action is whether it'd be something we can help you, and that would be great because it'd helped us.
You bet.
Yeah, this is an area chiefs thing where when we meet uh the area chiefs of police, um, you know, we can collectively put our stats together, present it.
But again, you need to present an option, and I do think bullstream um a mental health team and a car where that has a doctor, a nurse, a practitioner, and a psychologist, somebody that's uh trained in dealing with mental health and de-escalation, and those uh that's their their sole job.
That would be great to have that.
We just need to coordinate that and find the funding uh for that.
And I would suggest that funding, and because it's a healthcare component, needs to come from the province.
Yeah, okay.
Thank you.
Good.
Any other questions?
Nope.
No, we're good.
Okay.
Kim is not now not Kim.
Kim?
It's now not the time to talk about uh October.
October?
Got it.
I was just yeah, okay.
Okay, sounds good.
Can't now move receipt of the RCMP's media summary item C.
Second.
Okay.
Okay.
All this in favor.
Motion passed.
Received.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Really great having you here.
So before we go to the Besper Avenue, there's a gentleman who had called in for public participation and um he's been sitting there patiently.
So phone number ending in nine two two one.
Um, if you'd like to give us your your name and address and the issue on our agenda that you would like to speak to.
Caller, are you are you there?
1604-996-9221.
Don't forget to unmute yourself.
Hello.
The caller will need to push star six to unmute themselves.
Yeah, you need to press star six if to unmute yourself, caller.
Hello.
Hello.
Hello, can you hear me now?
Yes, we can.
Oh, excellent.
So my name is John O'Farrell from 292 Bestboro.
So I think you're going to go right into Besborough now.
Right.
And we do have your letter written.
That's right.
Correct.
I I've re uh I've written you a letter, and I was just calling to hear what you had to say.
And I sent another picture of another vehicle just now out in front of the house that is parked, I guess you could call it inappropriately, within the last 15 minutes or so.
So I just thought I would uh hear what uh what counsel had to say and uh just reiterate uh my frustration with regards to the parking on the street.
Okay, yeah, thank you very much.
Well you're more than welcome to to listen in, obviously.
And it and or just watch on the you can also just watch on the live stream, right?
You don't really need to call in in order to listen.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I uh I am actually I I called in, but I wanted to make sure that you knew that I was here, but also I am streaming online as well.
Okay, thanks very much.
So I'll pass the chair back to you, Councillor Lemon.
CAO Anima, Kim, do you want to speak to this, please?
Thank you, Chair Lemon.
Um, this issue arose in March when the gentleman on the line did make a presentation to council, and the end result of that uh meeting was a request that staff provide a report.
Now on Bestboro, we have received five complaints during 2020, all of which originate with the same complainant.
The complainant has explained that the parking activity has been making it very difficult for him to exit his driveway.
Um the roadway for Best Bessboro is less than six meters wide.
It's 5.8 meters wide.
And that means that anybody that does park across the street has to be entirely off of the roadway.
The complainant has asked that perhaps a residential parking sign might be arranged.
And when bylaw considered that solution, they recognize that a residential parking sign does allow persons that conduct business within 250 meters to park there.
And that seems to be the concern.
Many of the offenders are parking there to attend to business at 284 Helmkin, the small mall that's on the corner of Helmkin and Island Highway.
And so given the residential parking only sign would be ineffective as it's not seen by staff to be a solution.
The number of complaints and the distance doesn't seem to justify a residential only parking sign.
And so council's option is to receive the report or provide a residential parking and lease sign, recognizing that it may well deter some from parking, but it won't be a bylaw enforcement issue for those that are attending business at 284 Helmkin Road.
A third option would be to eliminate parking across from this complainant from his driveway to the corner at uh the corner of Bessborough and Helmet.
Now that's not described in your report, but that is another option.
The recommendation from staff is to receive the record.
Okay.
Um thank you.
Kim, or or uh council, any questions?
Council Rogers?
Yes, uh yes, thank you.
Um yeah, I understand the and appreciate the the concerns of the the residents and and again and and um there's you know I've not not only from this individual, but um I've heard other individuals uh concerned about um the parking of um on on on Besborough um because of the overflow or not able to park uh there at uh 284 Helmkin uh the business there so it it's been an ongoing problem and and that's but I specifically uh appreciate the concerns the uh this resident has um I I guess I just wanted to I get a point of clarification from from um CAU on on uh the the report here where it's uh suggesting that um even to put resident only parking that would mean that um the people using the business that 284 Helmican could still park there?
Provided they parked within 250 meters um or provided they attended to business within 250 meters of where they parked.
Okay.
So if they parked at the complete other end of Besborough, that might be more than 250 meters, but I suspect maybe not.
So yeah, yeah, it isn't it isn't an interesting problem.
And and um uh and if this is the individual that's only concerned, maybe um it would be a case of having no parking, you know, in the length of the that uh individual's property on both sides, 294 uh 292 Besborough.
Um I'm certainly um would like I'd like staff to assess that.
And I'm also wondering, you know, in terms of those distances, uh, when you think of um you know the hospital or any other businesses and and um any other potential businesses that might be coming up at the net the adjacent corners of the Holman and Island Highway, um whether that then would permit um um uh parking on on Eltham, for example, uh if there is a business that uh goes in there.
So it uh it has a broad implications um and um I think we need to uh assess this um not only for this particular resident, but for the implications elsewhere.
Thank you very much.
Um Councillor Mattson, do you have a question?
Not a particular question, but from what I gather from staff is we don't make maybe correct me if I'm wrong here, if we don't get a lot of complaints except for the specific individual who is just on the phone.
And is this an issue where just to address his concerns versus you know issues with the uh you know the the uh the the other neighbors in the in that area also are residents in our area also have finding this to be an issue?
It he did when if I can when he when he came to council, and he does mention this in his letter, he did present us with several letters from other people on the street, along with quite a few photos, and that was was March 17th.
I don't really see the problem with giving them a residential only sign myself.
The you know, we've done it for for res streets around the hospital, and I know enforcement is difficult and we don't actively enforce it, but I do think they stop a certain number of people from parking there regardless, and that may well be enough to solve the problem.
I mean, the picture we see in this, the fellow in the big truck.
I mean, I kind of understand that as someone who, you know, I often in the course of my business, I'm driving a 25-foot cube van, and if I need to pop into somewhere like Helmican Square, I can't exactly park it in the parking lot.
So I do look for a side street upon which to park to allow me to access that business.
So I don't know that I think that's unreasonable, but I'm also completely fine with putting up residential parking signs for that street.
So I've spoken with Mr.
O'Farrell and his neighbor who has equal frustrations.
I it seems to me that the your neighbor, um, Mr.
O'Farrell, or perhaps your neighbor and you are also frustrated with the um people people spin around that corner and then think, oh, this isn't what I gotta be.
So they use the driveways there.
I the neighbors actually put up a a blockade um that doesn't people don't even see it or care they just they just use the driveway anyway so they're just frustrated with with the um with the commercialization and uh of their street and the and the abuse of their of their uh driveways uh so firstly i i agree that um as a as a deterrent resident only signs makes sense to me.
So I'm happy to move the receipt of the report and and the staff install residential only signs on the street uh a second go ahead yes, a point of clarification.
I'm and certainly I'm supportive of the signs, but um we're talking the signs from Helmaken to View Royal Avenue, not Besborough all the way down.
Because the Besborough actually kept it.
Oh yeah, no, no, no, yeah, so it's that stretch from that one corner, Besborough to uh View Royal Avenue.
Yeah.
And and I do want to say, I mean, I understand the frustration and well just Besborough to View Royal Avenue.
No, I think it's on Besborough.
No, it's not.
It's not is not the stretch down to where John's mother lives.
That's right.
Oh, oh, no, okay, right.
Just that one.
Got it.
Two got it.
The block.
Yeah.
So I understand the frustration.
I don't, you know, when we hear about people being angry that people are turning around on the road and the commercialization of the area, I mean, that Virual Square has been there forever.
Um, you know, and then the roads do belong to everybody.
I mean, for as long as I've been in council.
They don't just belong to the people who live on that street.
Um, all the taxpayers pay for the roads, and they're all needed for people.
And so, I mean, there has to be balance when we look at these things.
Um, but making it so that it's residential only, you know, it it's I mean, we're not gonna actively enforce it.
We don't have the resources to actively enforce it.
Um, but it will dissuade us a certain number of people from parking for sure, I think.
So you made a motion and counselor rogers seconded it.
Okay.
Um, all those in favor.
Counselor Matson's also in favor.
Okay, so that is oh councillor Matson, yeah.
Right, right.
Um, okay, motion cast.
Good.
And um, I'll turn the chair over.
The last thing we have to do is just receive the correspondence from Mr.
O'Franzi.
Oh no, hang on, sorry, that's not way the way down the list.
Yeah, sorry.
Yeah, okay.
Okay, so moving into finance and admin.
Um, we're gonna go straight to the capital project update, and this is here at if anybody has any questions on any specific projects, otherwise, we'll just receive it for information.
Councillor Rogers.
Yeah, sorry, I have people remind me to keep turning off my mic.
So um yeah, a couple of questions if I may.
I I don't anyway.
The um I'm I'm looking at the numbers, I'm a little confused.
Um when I see the street lighting, Island Highway LED lights upgrade year two.
Uh it says that it's complete, um, but there's no black dot.
Is it because we haven't um got the bill yet?
I think that's actually last year.
Oh no, it's this year.
Yeah, this year.
So isn't Kevin?
Are you answering questions on that?
Yeah, Kevin here.
Yeah, so uh we yeah, the the the job is complete.
Uh we just have not received the invoicing yet from the contractor.
Just out of curiosity.
So what was that stretch, Kevin?
Uh there was there was multiple stretches.
So originally we had like a three-year plan uh to do all of the uh cobra style lighting.
Um but it was council's decision to just uh do year two and year three this year.
So we did uh all of Island Highway, uh Watkiss Way, parts of Helmakin.
Um and I think yeah, I think that's about it.
And Bern Chang.
I'm going to say that's right.
Yeah, we'll have a look.
Okay, thank you.
Yeah.
Just stay tuned.
I think there's more questions coming.
Right.
I get sorry, my next question is you know we have um uh you know those that are yellow which are deferred and those that are being uh put off until 2021.
Uh and I'm curious um you know frankly I would think that 2021 is a is an another version of deferral.
Um do we have a sense of how much the total amounts of um of funding that we have deferred and moved into 2021 uh yes your worship dawn here um when I did a quick uh total of the ones that have been definitely deferred, uh the total is close to $700 000.
I didn't count the ones that were identified as um scheduled for 2021.
Um I I think because um just I guess technically I thought of uh projects that were being deferred is uh we've identified those projects as being deferred because of funding issues to due to the pandemic, whereas um perhaps those scheduled for 2021, there may be some other reason for them to be delayed.
Okay, I guess we'll consider that next budget.
All right, thank you.
Counselor Mattson, did you have any questions?
No, just uh I guess my main question would be uh are any of the projects we currently have uh this online for this year.
I guess we're not much left of this year, uh in jeopardy at all because of you know we are there funding issues.
We've got enough funding, we don't have to worry about them.
I think we have enough enough funding to pay for what is is currently on track for sure.
Yeah, I mean I mean with our loss of casino revenue, I'm just wondering, and since most of that's for projects, uh wondering Dawn nodding our head that we have funding, I'm expecting the staff will probably bring forward a report relatively soon on sort of exactly what we have left in the casino pot, so to speak, because obviously we're gonna have to make it make it stretch.
Okay, thank you.
Kevin, I'm I'm curious on the Beaumont access.
Um it's it says September of this year, but I mean it it's been in progress for an awfully long time.
And I've actually had people asking me about it, which is unusual, but I've had probably three or four emails in the last six weeks wondering when on when it could be finished.
So you don't really need to tell me exactly now, but maybe you could follow up through with Kim on an email or something just so I can give people your idea.
I I I did speak with Dave and his crew today uh about the about the project, and they had advised me that it will be done in the fall.
Uh they they just kind of do some planting and we gotta wait until some good planting season and then uh it should be wrapped up in the fall.
So fall is anywhere from September 21st to December 21st or whatever it is.
Okay.
Yeah.
We have to start putting a lot of water.
Um okay, are there any other questions?
Yeah, okay.
Councillor, you're okay, Councillor Lemon.
Thank you.
So move receipt is moved by Councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Lemmon.
All in favor, opposed, that's carried.
And so probably the most important thing on our agenda this afternoon is the um the sewer user fee options.
And so, Don, are you gonna do a presentation on this?
Yes, your worship.
I have a presentation ready.
The floor is yours.
All right.
Thank you.
I'm just um getting myself set up here.
Everybody can hear me okay, I think, and I think you will you should be seeing my presentation.
So I will uh just go ahead and start.
Um I am cognizant of the time and that that uh you you folks do need to get to dinner before before too long, so that we can carry on with the evening's program.
So I want to um just identify just uh kind of where we are at um where we find ourselves today.
In December of 2019, council made the decision to move from a property tax to a user fee system to recover the costs related to the CRD sewer sewer service.
This meant that those costs would be based more closely on a measure of usage rather than property assessment values.
I think council will recall that.
Excuse me, View Royal executed the agreement with the Capital Regional District to move the sewer service costs away from the requisition to a separate invoice, which provides the regulatory basis for View Royal to add these costs to its sewer user bills.
So today we're going to talk about the rate structure for sewer user fees.
We'll consider various factors that play into the user fees, compare the recommended solution to the current solution, and gain an understanding of the rationale behind the recommendation and understand the impact to the different classes of users.
That we are presenting and recommending to you today would see a rate structure that bases 100% of the cost to be recovered on consumption is applied differently to three different classes of users and is and is based on slightly different consumption for for the classes.
The volumetric rate would be a single rate for residential users, no matter what the consumption, and would be progressive, a progressive rate, which means the rate increases at higher levels of consumption.
The recommendation is to replace the flat fee based on a single family equivalent per current bylaw schedule with a hundred dollar minimum fee per account.
So we'll go through each one of these elements separately.
So costs to be recovered.
We are recommending that 100% of the cost to be recovered should be recovered by a volumetric rate.
You can see the costs there in front of you that total $2.25 million.
Currently, under the current bylaw, 15% of the total costs are recovered through a flat fee and 85% through a volumetric rate.
This change simplifies the rate structure and allows other elements of the rate structure to achieve the distribution of costs to achieve the desired objectives.
I think the smoke is bothering my throat, so I apologize if I'm a bit scratchy.
With the recommendation, we are recommending that users should be identified by class.
So the recommended rate structure would see the properties assigned to one of three classes.
Doing this allows us to align different rates and consumption measures to each class.
The recommendation is to make the class assignments based on BC assessments actual use codes rather than the tax close tax codes or having staff determine what class of property should be in.
The actual use codes, while I am not an expert in how BC assessment determines those codes, we find when we looked closely at them that they more they kind of more closely correlate to the activities that we view on the property and those activities that create demand for the sewer services.
For example, an RV park or a longer longer stay motel building may be assigned a tax class 01 or residential for tax purposes.
But the actual use code when we look at BC assessment data assigns these to a commercial actual use code, a commercial campground or a motel.
So, using BC assessment data to determine the user fee class, we get a level of independence as a as compared to, let's say, an internal staff decision to assign a property to a class.
So there that's an element of of independence that kind of gives give takes it out of staff's hands.
It is easily verifiable by both staff and the property owner.
The current rate structure does not assign classes to users or users to classes, I should say, except for the determination of flat fees, and we'll talk about that in a little bit.
So the recommendation is that we use a different consumption base for different classes.
That sounds complicated, but it's really not.
The consumption analysis indicates that the variance between winter and summer water consumption for residential and non residential users is about 20% less for of total is about 20% less in the winter than in the summer when you compare winter to summer for the residential and non residential users.
So the difference between so residential and non residential users, for example, for example, uses 40% in the winter and 60% in the summer.
For the institutional users, the variance between winter and summer is only a 10% difference.
The current rate structure uses winter only consumption for all users.
So this means that 100% of the costs that are recovered by way of a volumetric rate have been based historically on 40 to 45% of the actual consumption.
So the recommendation is that for the institutional class, we will use full year consumption.
So properties in the institutional class, so that's primarily hospital and schools, will pay for 100% of the consumption of their sewer service based on water consumption.
Non residential and residential consumption, we would use the annualized winter consumption.
So that is the consumption between November and April, except that we would annualize it, or really what that means is double that for use for the whole year.
We need to annualize the winter consumption because it to provide the same basis on which we're calculating consumption for the institutional class.
So that's the rationale for that.
We would use the winter consumption for both residential and non residential, recognizing that the bulk of the difference between winter and summer consumption is for irrigation purposes, which does not create a burden on the sewer system.
Structuring the rate on annualized consumption also provides greater comparability with other municipalities as it seems this better matches what other municipalities are doing.
So when we look at uh flat versus a minimum charge, the recommendation is that the current flat fee per that is calculated per single family equivalent or SFE should be replaced with a hundred dollar minimum charge per account.
So I I don't know if you recall, and it is included in your agenda package, the bylaw that was attached to the report that went to council in December of last year.
The schedule to the to the bylaw that determines the flat fees or the SFE factors for each kind of category of users are fairly there's a list, but it's not very necessarily easy to figure out how those factors uh you know kind of were correlated to the burden a specific user or category of users have on a system capacity I'm sure there was a big a big study in engineering um you know uh about liters per capita per day um you know that that established these factors in the beginning but it's not clearly understood whether the assumptions made to determine those factors are still valid today.
For example, why is the hospital a thousand and eighty units?
We think that relates to the number of beds, but then how do how do we get a factor that relates to that?
Um so you know, you know, for example, uh, restaurants, the restaurant category is based on per 25 seats or portion thereof, it's 1.5 times a single family equivalent.
Um what what this you know the challenges that this provides for us is that this is um not independently determined.
Staff have to ask the property owner or or have the owner self-report how many seats they have in their restaurant.
It's also not very easily verifiable, and it's certainly not you know not independent.
And then how often are we going to verify this data to make sure that we're still charging the correct amount?
So all of those factors kind of relate to what we what I would summarize as a bit of a high administration cost related to the flat fees.
What might be more simple, and what we are recommending is to uh eliminate the flat fee, but instead charge a minimum cost, so every bill would never be below this minimum.
Um, we are suggesting that should be $100.
It's simple to understand and administer, it's verifiable because it's just per account, and it does capture users with little or no winter consumption.
So for those snowbirds who probably aren't going south for the winter, but should anybody you know get the opportunity to fly south for the winter and turn off their water before they leave and then turn it back on when they come back, um, since we're only counting winter consumption, we don't want them to completely escape contributing to the sewer costs as they are benefiting from it, and so they would pay the minimum of a hundred dollars.
This would also capture accounts that would come on stream mid-year or are deactivated mid-year.
It's estimated that we that the minimum would affect about a hundred accounts based on the current consumption data, and those will be those that have winter consumption less than 23 cubic meters.
It should follow a three-tier progressive structure for only nonresidential and institution institutional user classes.
So the current rate structure applies a single cubic meter rate to all winter consumption for all classes.
That's what we're doing right now.
The recommendation is to implement what's called a progressive rate for non residential and institutional users.
And a progressive rate simply means that the rate increases at certain levels of consumption, certain higher levels of consumption.
Residential users would pay this still continue to pay the same rate per cubic meter for all build consumption.
The rate for institutional and non institution, non residential users would increase after the first thousand meters of cubic meters of consumption.
So at this point, we're suggesting that that rate would be 110% of the base rate.
At 1,000 for after the first thousand cubic meters, the rate would go to 110% of whatever the base rate is.
42 of the total of 61 non residential and institutional counts would fall in this first tier, which means that they would be billed at the same base rate as the residential users, even though they're classed non residential or institutional, in if in that case.
But for users with consumption greater than a thousand cubic meters, the rate would go up by 10% or to 110%, and would be applied to the portion of the consumption that is greater than a thousand cubic meters.
So it's not not everything not all of it is would be charged at that higher rate, but simply that consumption that's greater than a thousand cubic meters.
Similarly, for users with consumption greater than 11,000 cubic meters, so they'd get the first thousand meters at the base rate, the next 10,000 cubic meters at 110% of the base rate.
But if they consumed more than the 11,000 cubic meters, the rate would go up by 25% of the base.
So it would be 125% of the base, and that would be applied to the portion of consumption that is greater than 11,000 cubic meters.
Certainly provides a consent a conservation incentive for those high volume users that have an ability to reduce their consumption.
Costs relating to greater infrastructure requirements, greater sizing for pump stations, greater capacity for the pipes, it shifts some of the burden for that high capacity, not just because the volume is greater, but because we have to have bigger infrastructure to be able to handle it.
So implications.
Implications are in a kind of a new rate structure, especially with bringing in the cost from the CRD sewer system, when we're shifting from a split assessment and user fee system to a 100% user fee system.
And certainly we have found in our further analysis that what we predicted would happen as far as implications is indeed what you should expect.
And that that being primarily that if you had a home with an average assessment and you also had an average consumption of water, winter water consumption as a residence, generally speaking, you're not going to be paying more.
However, if your consumption is high under this new scenario and even you know, when we when we played with very you know several different models along this line, we still find of course that the higher users are going to pay high pay you know significantly more or potentially significantly more, um whereas the the the properties that consume less are gonna pay less because that's the nature of the system that we're moving to.
The impact of the assessments certainly do will influence or modify that effect somewhat, but generally speaking, in in a user pay system, you use more, you pay more, and that's the general principle.
So the current rate structure achieves some level of equity when compared with the system that splits the cost between the tax bill and the user fee based on consumption, as was the case in 2019.
So you can see that in 2019, when the bill was split between taxes and user fees, the percent of total consumption by the institutional users was about 18%, and they contributed as a class about 8% of the costs.
Primarily, this was because the institutional class, there were some pretty large institutions that were tax exempt, and they didn't can they didn't contribute to that system, which was primarily why December in December council decided that we needed to move away from that system.
Under the current bylaw, so the current rate structure, and by that I mean under the current bylaw, what's in the bylaw right now, you see that that because we go to a user pay system, there there is a greater level of equity.
Now the institutional user, now I'm using 2020 data consumption data for this.
You can see that the institutional as a class with 17% of consumption contributes 17% of the costs.
So this looks pretty even Stephen, and nice and equity uh equitable.
However, that does not reflect necessarily the additional burden that those high users place on the system, which the recommended rate structure has been designed specifically to place a higher burden on those higher users.
So that you can see that with the institutional class with 18% of the consumption, these numbers are different just because of the consumption base that we're using, the institutional using the full year consumption as opposed to strictly winter water consumption.
So the institutional as a class consuming or comprising 18% of the consumption pays 21% of the total contribution to the total sewer costs.
The average residents under the recommended rate structure structure would pay about $335, $336 if they have 77 cubic meters of water consumption, whereas in 2019 that number was just over $400.
So the recommendation is that a bylaw be prepared to implement sewer user fees based on water consumption, which means we mean year-round consumption for institutional users and annualized winter consumption for non-residential and residential users, and a three-tier progressive rate structure for institutional and non-residential users.
And you can see the details there.
If council confirms today the recommended rate structure, staff will start preparing communication to the affected users.
We would focus primarily on those for whom the change is significant, of course.
We will also be working on a bylaw and return a bylaw to you with some recommendations to mitigate the impacts to the users that would be most negatively affected.
The bylaw needs to be adopted in October so that we can send the bills out on a timely basis.
Business day before Christmas to allow the greatest amount of time for payment.
We may also like to ask council to consider measures that would allow some users to carry a balance past December 31st for this year only without penalty or interest.
You could say in response to COVID, but you could also say because of this change, because there will be a smaller number of accounts that will be struggling.
And I'm thinking especially of the strata corporations who only set their strata fees once a year.
And you know, previously when each individual strata owner paid the taxes, which in 2019 comprised part of this cost, this year we'll be sending them a bill for the whole thing.
And they paid taxes, well, tax due date is June is September 30.
Um, you know, and not everybody will remember that their tax bill went down and now some of those costs um may be transferred over to the user fee bill.
So it's just kind of out of consideration for for them and giving them a little bit more time to adjust.
If I can thank you, Don.
So I did have one question.
Oh hang on, Councilor Matson.
Councillor Lemmon.
Um thank you, Don.
Uh I I think I understand the the purpose and spirit of this, but I have a couple of questions about how it will work for um the residential and non-residential.
So does this mean that if I go if I go away and don't flush my toilet, or even if I'm there and I don't flush my toilet or run my water for you know much of the year, there's a hundred dollar bill.
Correct?
That is correct.
There would be a minimum $100 bill.
Okay.
Now if I own a small shop, like say the little SBCA thrift shop that's in Admiral's Walk, where you it's just a, you know, it's a maw and paw operation, and what would this mean for them?
For for for small businesses, non-residential, but very low users uh um are you thinking about a commercial property where you know a business is renting one of the units at the commercial property yeah okay um just to make sure i understand so likely that property has one or in some cases two meters we currently send a bill to the property as a whole okay based on their metered consumption.
How they divvy that up to their leaseholders um we we don't we don't get into that um so yeah um uh you know, we we we base it on the metered consumption, and that will depend on whether or not an individual property has one or more meters.
Okay.
So if it's a owner operator uh business where they own property too, but it's small, just you know, small.
Um would it be comparable to the residential?
It will not only be comparable, it would be identical as long as the consumption was less than a thousand cubic meters.
Got it.
Good.
Thank you.
In in the in the the the annualized winter was less uh winter consumption was was less than a thousand cubic meters in a year.
And and that's quite a bit.
Okay.
I mean, in in general, this is a positive thing for commercial taxpayers, right?
I mean, all the samples you've provided show a decrease in cost for any of the commercial assessments.
It is really interesting when compared to 2019.
Um, I think I described in December, how there would be winners and losers.
Those winners and losers um kind of relate, well, not kind of, actually fairly directly relate to whether or not the property that was serviced was high, had a high assessment or or you know, kind of is kind of that relation between the assessment and the consumption.
So if there is a rather large multi use residential commercial property that has a very, very high assessment and their consumption of water is low relative to their assessment, they will see a significant reduction in their sewer bill.
However, if um if you have a very high consumption and your assessment in 2019 was relatively lower, then you will have a ver uh uh you could have a significant significantly uh larger increase.
Right.
Count Councillor Manson?
Yeah, this is uh for the for people like myself who have this lovely water feature that ends up using way more water than it should.
And certainly it doesn't go down the sewer.
Is there any way of accommodating people in the similar situation?
Could could you maybe provide a little bit more information as to your lovely water feature that you're concerned about?
Well, a little my my leaky waterfall.
And so I and I I'm just curious what I don't really know is like how much water you'd actually have to use before that 10 uh 10 and 25% actually come into effect.
Yes.
Um and and and while I I don't know the specifics around the consumption for any uh for you know for a specific device, um certainly the the reason why we choose winter water consumption is is certainly to avoid charging on irrigation.
Additionally, our bylaw um allows um for separate meters.
Um uh uh let me put it this way: the CRD's water bylaw allows um for installation of separate meters for irrigation purposes only.
And we do not charge on those meters where the CRD has identified to us that that is an irrigation meter.
So I might suggest that if there was a property that found that they were using or that they had a use for water that did not contribute at all to the sewer to place a burden on the sewer system, that they would approach and think about approach a CRD and think about having a separate meter installed and a separate system installed so that we could, you know, basically to have two meters, one for irrigation or for this purpose, and then the other for their actual uh water consumption that would contribute to this to the burden on the sewer system.
I could only imagine how much water you'd have to use before that paid for itself.
I appreciate your answer.
So thank you.
Indeed.
Counselor Rogers.
Yes, um Ron, you should apply for the agriculture water rate.
Um so uh but it did raise the point, um, Don, and I think you helped me because I was wondering about farms and uh because they get the agriculture rate, but obviously that's irrigation, so that's not counted.
That's good.
Uh yeah, I'm I'm certainly a supportive of uh the staff recommendation.
A few questions.
Um how does this compare to the other municipalities?
Are we uh is this being consistently applied?
That is a very good question.
And I did spend a significant amount of time looking at at um how other municipalities do it, which which is a daunting task, I must say, to begin with, because everybody has just a little bit of a different system and and and um you know uh they they apply it differently.
I would like to think that I took the best of all that I saw out there in devising this rate structure.
Um certainly it didn't generate some ideas.
I think that um, you know, certainly by um uh going this direction, we become more in line with what the other municipalities are doing for especially for those, of course, that have removed um or or that that are treating this CRD cost as we are now doing.
Um that is putting it on the user fees.
So, yes, um, I would say this brings us into um closer comparison with other municipalities.
I I suppose one of the uh um variants variations might be that uh those folks are on well water or they're using septic systems and not uh you know they're totally rural.
So that would that would be an example where they wouldn't be using this approach.
That is correct.
They would not be even getting a minimum bill.
If they if they are not connected to the system and they don't place a burden on the system at all, they don't get a bill.
Okay.
So um the the main concern I have, and you can help me with this one is with respect to strata corporations, strata councils, and so forth.
Um, and I'm wondering what the implications are.
You're saying that individuals, I guess, an individual that was uh in the 40 unit strata, and they were in unit one, they were getting their water bill through taxes, and now it's something that's uh going to be applied to the entire strata corporation, and they have to divide it up to the 40 units.
Is that how it's gonna work?
Yeah, yes, it will, although we do need to remember that um previous to this year, the strata corporations did already get a single water, sorry, a single sewer bill bill from View Royal because they have one meter going into the 40 unit strata complex.
Now instead of that bill representing just the costs for our View Royal sewer system, it will also be representative of the cost or will include the costs related to the CRD sewer system.
So it's just basically taking a bill that represented only a part of the costs and now making sure that it includes all of the costs and taking those CRD costs off of the tax bill that was sent to the individual strata unit property holder.
So however, the Strata Corporation divvied up the unit costs to its individual 40 units, the how or whatever formula they use to do that will remain, you know, they could do the same thing.
It's just that now the bill is a larger bill.
Yeah.
So you our concern is not how they do it.
It's that we get the money that of the water they used yes we we will base it on their water consumption.
My concern with the Strata Corp is a little bit about timing in that you know in October they're going to get a bill that may be larger than they expected because this is the first year of doing it this way and they may not have raised their strata fees high enough to to pay that bill um uh you know uh at immediately.
I think that's probably an understatement, right i mean a lot of them probably don't know it's coming because the individual units have been paying it on their taxes until now um and all of a sudden the strata is going to get a whopping great bill so we're gonna have to really stick handle that and explain it very well yeah yeah it it would be my my intention council to identify all of the strata corps we know exactly you know who they are and how to contact them um and um and and handle them individually and make sure that they fully understand what is happening why it's happening um and how much time we will give them to to pay good i i have kind of an odd question um but is v royal absolved from having to be an institutional member we use a lot of water in the summer right yeah i mean us we we irrigate a lot which i know isn't i'm just curious i mean does that a or do we just completely exclude ourselves why we expect other government agencies to pay we do exclude ourselves and there's no philosophical struggle, I take it by your succinct answer.
And the kingdom shell we've and that's the fire hole.
Yeah, the fire hole as well.
I am.
What about the CRD water building, Don, which is tax exempt?
Will they now be expected to pay?
That is correct, yes.
So I mean that makes sense.
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, go down.
That road too far.
Okay, so there is a I move status recommendation.
Thank you.
So status recommendation is moved by Councillor Rogers.
Second.
Seconded by Councillor Lemon.
All in favor.
Opposed.
That's carried.
Thank you, Don and staff.
I know a lot of work has gone into that, into bringing it to this point.
And um it's it's good to see.
And and we'll obviously have to figure out a really good PR campaign, as you were saying, especially with the stratas, I think, is it's going to be a bit of an issue.
Yeah.
Yeah, well done.
Yeah.
Thank you so much.
And um we will move on to our CAO update.
And um, in the interest of feeding us all, we might like to be relatively brief.
Kim.
Thank you, Dirk.
I don't believe I have a reputation for being long.
No, that's true.
Yeah.
I only have a few things to say about a bucket report.
I think that um today is a milestone.
We've heard of the um the committee of the whole being held today.
We uh we haven't had a committee of the hall meeting since March.
And so today's a big day for us.
Um, one of the successes that we have is the introduction of the video streaming, the web streaming.
And while we had a budget of some $37,000 for web streaming, what we've done far exceeds what the original budget intended.
We are interacting with the general public, we are inviting others to make presentations.
We have a very significant program here that um I think is very successful, and our staff are to be commended for their work.
It really has worked well, and it is wonderful the work that we've been doing.
Um to move on, um Stone Ridge wetland restoration.
I think that that's deserving of mention as well.
We've had a large number of volunteers participate in that project, and that project is nearing completion, and um it too is a significant uh statement about View Royal and the volunteers that support us.
And I think those are the items I wanted to highlight.
So thank you.
Great, thank you, Kim.
Do you have any questions for uh CAO, Councillor Rogers?
Uh yes, a couple.
Um, yeah, I'm I'm really pleased that uh the VRO Park Master Plan will be able to go to the advisory committees.
So that's that's really excellent.
And um, I'm also really impressed with the GIS uh ability for to be able to look at uh tree permits and and that sort of nice use of technology.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councillor Matson, do you have anything?
Just a quick one.
It's not on here, but how are we doing with staff in the COVID issues, policies, et cetera?
I just want to know how we're doing now.
I think by and large we have become quite comfortable with the trend over time.
I think Vancouver Island has been very successful in terms of the number of cases on the island.
And while initially our staff were quite concerned, um, we are still very cautious.
We have not become complacent, but uh things have relaxed.
We are concerned about the possibility of a second wave and what uh measures need to be taken.
We are currently reviewing the policies that we've introduced in uh the months at the start of the COVID experience, and we will be tweaking some of those policies to make sure that uh we address all of the concerns and benefit from what we've learned.
Okay, thank you.
Councilor Lemmon.
Yeah, um Kim, do we have a means of tracking uh the numbers of people viewing uh the council meetings after the fact?
I believe we do, but I would defer to um our director of finance, Ms.
Christensen might have a better answer.
Uh yes, uh Councillor Lemon, we certainly do.
We have the ability to track both uh attendees um and you know basically uh when they come on and then when they leave so we can a little bit judge kind of what part of the agenda is the most interesting to them but also we can track uh who has viewed the recording after the fact so at any point in time I can I you know I can I can certainly tell you you know what the uptake is of a recorded council meeting.
Okay good and do we have do we have wide viewership?
No I I I would suggest that viewership may be a relative term so so if you think about many council meetings where we didn't have a lot of attendees at all um in council chambers pre-COVID, um, we we we are doing better than that.
And our and our ratings can only go up.
Yeah.
Okay, thank you.
So we just need a motion to receive the report.
So moved.
Moved and seconded by Councillor Rogers and Lemon.
Thank you very much, and we'll see everyone at seven o'clock.
So good evening, everyone, and welcome.
This is the continuation of our afternoon meeting.
We start at 3 30 and we take a dinner break and then we reconvene.
So I'm not going to read the entire statement out that I do at the beginning of the meeting.
But for any of you who are wishing to speak under public participation, you need to dial 778-402-9227.
And then the conference ID number is 150 012 433 pound.
And I would encourage you to do that.
We have a petition and delegation first up, which will go for a little while, but um and then public participation will be immediately on the heels of that.
So if you're planning on calling in, please do call in early.
It just keeps keeps the meeting moving along.
And you'll be identified by me saying the last four digits of your phone number.
And at that point, if you can give us your your name and address, and you have up to five minutes to give us the the benefit of your views.
Um and so with that, we will just um go right through to Kathleen Gilbert.
You're registered under petitions and delegations.
Are you there, Kathleen?
Your worship, we are having some issues with Kathleen's audio currently that we are trying to sort out.
Okay.
You need to unmute yourself, Kathleen, possibly with star six.
She's just coming in.
She'll be here just momentarily.
Oh, okay.
Thank you.
That quick.
Kathleen, are you there?
I am.
Go ahead.
Welcome, Kathleen.
Oh, welcome.
Are you ready for me?
We're ready for you whenever you're ready.
Great.
Thank you so much.
And good evening, Mary and Council.
And thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.
Uh technical issues always, yikes.
Um, my name is Kathleen Gilbert.
I live at uh number 68, 14 Erskine Lane.
And I'm here tonight representing many concerned residents of both 14 Erskine Lane and Stone Ridge, 163 of whom are named in the petition that was sent to everyone.
I've been a resident of U Royal for 13 years, three here on Erskine Lane.
Now I understand that the developer will be presenting a new plan tonight, so I'm very hopeful that most of our concerns will be addressed in that new plan.
However, in case they are not, I would like to make them very clear.
So over the last decade, there has been dramatic changes to this neighborhood, including the Eagle Creek Mall, a rezoning for the property to the former youth detention center, the new transit station coming soon to your neighborhood, two significant projects proposed, and of course the potential for another two here on our narrow dead end street of Erskine Lane.
I want to start by assuring you that this is not a NIMBY situation.
Most of us are not opposed to the development of this property.
In fact, I think we all really understand that this is inevitable.
That piece of property will be developed.
What we are opposed to is a developer given what appears to be carte blanche to come in and clear cut a forest and erect four, five or six story buildings.
Sorry, with no concern for either the existing neighbors or the families who will eventually live in this neighborhood.
In the past, this council has been amazing and has always insisted that developers respect the existing neighbors and those who reside in and around the different developments.
And it's my understanding that the beautiful Game Road Parkland was established because this council insisted that the developer of Stone Ridge leave that Gary Oak Forest for the enjoyment of all of the community.
And that was amazing, and we all thank you all very much for that.
And more recently, the development of Eagle's Nest has been remarkable in the positive changes that the developer has made as opposed to his first plan.
And those all came out of concerns from neighbors, and this council listening to neighbors and insisting that the developer also listens and takes those concerns seriously.
So we have to ask here in our small little community, why has it been that it appears that West Urban not only has been allowed to ignore us, but in fact the plans that were shown to us at a meeting in January were nothing like the pictures and the plans that subsequently came up and were posted on their website.
So I know most of you on council are aware of our concerns, and I know the developer is as well.
But I will mention them once again.
Our concern is the safety of all who live in the area and those who use Erskine Lane to access the galloping goose.
And for the safety of people who will reside in those four buildings.
Those are cyclists, including lots of children.
They're walkers, they're joggers, they're families pushing strollers and they're walking their dogs down up and down our street and up and down the galloping goose.
So right now, with our very narrow eight-meter-wide street, it is already a safety concern.
Once you add another thousand plus people and hundreds of cars to our street, it will be an accident waiting to happen unless this council and this developer put community safety first.
So what do we need?
And what are we asking for?
We're asking for a widening of and traffic calming of Erskine Lane, a sidewalk, a bike lane, traffic control, including crosswalks on Watkis at Erskine, and we need this prior to construction.
We can't be two or three years dodging construction vehicles coming up and down this very narrow street.
So we need also significant setbacks of the buildings.
As right now, this property is like 10 meters from my backyard and about 10 other, well, actually, it's 12 other families.
So we need a barrier of existing trees left around the property to help provide at least some privacy from these towering buildings.
And that's not an exaggeration.
Five stories may not sound high, but when you put those five stories on an already elevated ground, they're going to be towering above us.
And finally, we need this developer to have some concern for one of the last remaining large stands of mature forests in View Royal.
I can tell you, I had to go downtown yesterday.
The difference between my backyard and downtown Victoria in terms of smoke was amazing.
I have to think that that, or I do believe that that was because we're surrounded by trees.
So trees are really important for a whole bunch of reasons.
And one last point that I think the council needs to consider is the strain that this many new families could put on an already overcrowded Eagle Creest Elementary.
And that's it.
That's all I'd like to say tonight.
But I do want to thank everyone for listening, and I would certainly like to thank the counselors who took the time to come out and look at this property and hear our concerns.
Your time was so greatly appreciated.
And we look forward to working with both this council and the developers to create a project in our neighborhood that we can all be proud of and that will increase both property values and a strong sense of community.
So thank you very much.
Thank you, Kathleen.
I just have a question.
It it from what you said at the beginning, it does sound like your your presentation and thoughts are based on the plan that council already rejected.
They're based on the plans that we see on still on the website.
Well, I haven't checked in the last couple of weeks, but still on the website of the developer.
That's what they're based on.
Okay.
Because so yeah, I mean I think obviously you're you're tuned in, but it's certainly worth uh uh staying on the live stream tonight because you will see uh it's it's another another version.
I mean the one you're talking about in January was the very initial proposal, which was quickly axed, and then they had another one which came to council and was rejected.
And so this is the third incarnation since then.
Yeah, and and I'm well aware of that, and uh thank you for pointing that out though, uh, to uh people that might be listening.
But um I I you know I I think it's just important that we continue to voice our concerns and and to make sure that what are what we need in our neighborhood isn't lost.
Um but I am very hopeful, as I said at the beginning that the developer's new plan will address our concerns and that would be wonderful suggesting anything but but I also think it's important in fairness to the developer that we're commenting and working on the latest plan so that that's that's point taken yeah okay thank you okay so we're gonna move right into public participation so anyone who would like to call in um can call the 778-402 nine two two seven number.
And then if you look on your screen, the the conference ID number is there.
So do we have anyone on the line staff?
Yes, your worship.
We have five callers waiting.
The first one, the last four digits is 7414.
Okay, so caller with the last four digits, 7414.
This is your opportunity.
If you can press star six to unmute yourself, please, and then um give us your name and address.
And you have up to five minutes to give us the benefit of your views.
Caller with the last digits 7414.
You you do need to unmute yourself.
So that that could be the problem because we can't hear you, so it's star six to unmute yourself.
Your worship, that caller may have left.
Um we can go on to the next one, and if they appear again, I will call them out again.
Um the next caller would be the one with the last four digits two four eight zero.
Okay, caller with the last four digits two four eight zero.
You could unmute yourself and and give us your name and address, please.
Ian Brown calling at 328 Stewart Avenue.
Okay, go ahead.
Yeah.
Um you've probably read my letter, and one of my concerns about this is that we have a council who has declared a climate emergency in the last year or so and um whose uh intention to act on that emergency was that every issue in the before the town would be viewed through a lens of climate change.
And I am wanting to see this forest viewed through the lens of climate change since it's a pretty major um contributor to sequestering um uh carbon emissions.
And um what I would propose to council is that you consider seriously postponing this rezoning for anywhere from six months to a year and doing investing in a natural assets inventory for the whole town from the municipal natural assets institute.
That'll cost a little bit of money for this town.
It's worth about $25,000 and it costs $2,500.
It would give you a whole framework of the dollar value of this property in terms of natural assets, and of course, all the other locations in town, too.
And um I think that if you could look at that for thoroughly, you would realize that this might be a piece of forest that we should keep forever and uh look at other open properties unforested for housing developments in this town.
Anyway, I wish to ask you to consider waiting until you have a good natural assets inventory before you consider thoroughly rezoning this piece of property.
Thanks for listening.
Okay, thank you, Ian.
Uh your worship, our next caller would have the last four digits one one three four.
Okay, caller with the last four digits one one three four.
One one three four.
Do remember to press star six to unmute yourself.
Good evening.
My name is Sheila Shergold, and I'm at 14 Erskine Lane, Unit 5.
I respectfully wanted to reiterate what Kathleen Gilbert has said with respect to safety on Erskine Lane.
The width of the lane as it currently stands, with an increase of many extra people living on our street, causes us concern with respect to traffic and sidewalks and the safety of people that use the laneway right now.
So to to us, it's really important that um those aspects of the project are seriously looked at.
Um the last thing we want is to have anyone, you know, God forbid get hurt uh on such a narrow laneway uh with the increase in traffic.
So if that could be looked at, it would be much appreciated.
Thank you so much.
Okay, thanks for calling in.
You're welcome.
Your worship, the next caller has the last four digits 3046.
Okay, caller with the last four digits of 3046.
Thank you for taking the call.
I'm uh Roger Champaign and Glenda Champagne, and we're both listening, and we live at 14 Erston Lane, directly across from the proposed development.
Our concerns are also what has been spoken of earlier, but we especially feel strongly about the congestion that we're going to be facing on getting in and out onto Watkis from uh Erskine Lane.
It's um currently difficult enough when rush hour is on to get out, and um we'd like to see how that will be addressed in the new proposal.
The other concern is that it is a beautiful large piece of forested land that uh we would like to see preserved as much as possible.
Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
Thank you.
Your worship, the next caller has the last four digits of 5513.
5513.
Okay, the next caller, please, is the last four digits of 5513.
You there, caller, number 5513.
And remember to press.
I know I sound repetitive, but press um star six to unmute yourself.
Caller five five one three.
Okay, maybe we can go to the next one, Don, and then circle back.
Absolutely.
Yes, the next caller is last four digits, nine three, six, one.
Okay, caller nine three six one.
For last four digits, nine three six one.
Hello.
Hi, this is Chris Stewart from twenty-two Earth can lean.
Jack, go ahead.
Yes, hi.
Cascine's already expressed it quite well.
Our biggest concerns is the going to be the traffic.
The traffic on the lane is going to be extremely concerning to us.
We are actually the owners of a daycare on the corner.
And obviously the traffic increase with between number two and and number seven, the other apartment building at the bottom of Erskine, we're going to be looking at in the neighborhood of six, seven hundred extra cars on our quiet little lane.
One of the traffic proposals I was reading in the uh in the proposal that was presented with the new development was that our existing traffic constitutes about 20% of what they forecast the traffic to be.
So that implies that 80% of the traffic is actually going to be associated with the new buildings, which is extremely concerning.
The road is already fairly busy, and with this, we are going to be uh dealing with a tremendous amount of traffic.
We also are a little bit concerned again.
The forest is beautiful, it's one of the last natural forests in the area.
And building these five story buildings in there is just going to be daunting.
It's going to really decimate the the look and feel of the neighborhood.
We were really hoping that we would see something a little bit more like we saw around the corner of Burnside and Watkiss, where the developer built townhouses that really seemed to integrate well into the forest.
They really looked like they cared very much about the environment.
And we knew this area would be developed.
We expected that.
We're not anti-development.
But we were really hoping to see something that would be much more integrated.
So five-story buildings, 350 odd units.
I do recognize they reduced the number of units recently.
They went from six to five stories on the lower half.
But we would really have loved to have seen a decline down to three or four stories or just a a design that really seemed to incorporate the forest.
It still seems that we're we're going to be towered over by these large buildings and dealing with a tremendous amount of excess traffic that just seems like it's going to change the neighborhood for the worst.
And again, this isn't a development in isolation.
Number seven is happening down at the bottom and we know that that's going to be a lot of extra truck cars as well.
This is a dead end little lane.
We were really hoping that this development would be in fitting with the neighborhood a little bit better.
And it's gonna be a real effect on our well personally we're on the corner so we're really concerned about even just getting our vehicles in and out.
We do have a daycare so it's going to have an impact on my my wife's business, which is obviously the community service daycare's are hard to find nowadays.
We've already had even with the limited traffic that we have now.
We've already had people come whipping around the corner and almost driving into the parents as they come in and out.
So we um we respectfully ask that council does consider trying to reduce the number of units further from the 36 reduction that was currently proposed, so that uh that also brings down the traffic as well as makes that development fit more nicely into the forest.
Thank you so much for considering my ask.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Thank thank you for calling in.
Your your worship, we have our caller last four digits seven four one four is now back.
Right.
Okay, caller with the last four digits 7414.
Hi, my name is Sylvia May.
My husband and I live at number 3114 Erskine Lane.
And I would like to thank you for hearing our voices.
We have lived here for six years, absolutely love it.
And I must say we are not opposed to development in our area at all, but we do have some concerns.
I have written a letter, but if you don't mind if I could just read some of it, because not everybody has had access to the letters or have read them.
We are all ages living in our complex at 14 Erskine Lane.
The density of the proposed complex at number nine Erskine Lane is a huge concern.
The safety of pedestrians and cyclists needs to be addressed.
A traffic analysis was done and it accounted for cars on Erskine Lane at certain times of the day.
It does not appreciate the many neighborhood residents, many elderly that regularly go for walks, those that walk their dogs several times a day, people getting on and off the bus at Watkiss Way, school age children coming and going to school, and those cyclists and walkers that use the Galloping Goose Trail.
It is a narrow, hilly road that will not accommodate those that use it while construction of number nine and number seven Erskine Lane is taking place.
We absolutely need somewhere to walk, a sidewalk, a bike lane, somewhere out of harm's way prior to construction taking place on these sites.
It is unimaginable how Erskine Lane could ever accommodate the large dump trucks removing soil driving past someone walking on the same road.
Erskine Lane was not built originally for that kind of traffic, and as you know, it is quite narrow.
This absolutely needs to be addressed prior to construction.
The intersection of Watkisway and Erskine Lane also needs to be addressed.
Traffic lights or a roundabout with a pedestrian crossing needs to be in place to control the increase in traffic.
The developer of number nine should be funding this controlled intersection with such an increase in vehicles from that site.
Again, this also needs to be addressed prior to construction.
Safety is a huge issue regarding this development.
Can lot number two be utilized in some way to have traffic enter or exit directly on Watkisway?
Parking on Erskine Lane is very limited.
The developer should be required to have two levels of underground parking for tenants living on number nine.
We understand the developer at the corner of Helmicton and Burnside has made those adjustments to his new development and we believe it should be absolutely mandatory for this developer to do the same with such an increase in vehicles on Erskine Lane.
We've also talked about a designated community playground and with the increase in families and the development of number nine we are hoping that development will also include a playground either on that property or close by for all to use.
Personally, we would rather much rather see a townhouse development go on number nine rather than rental apartments with a maximum of three stories in height.
It would be in keeping with the existing neighborhood and would add value to the area.
The tree removal needed for this proposed large development on this site is quite aggressive.
As I mentioned in the beginning, my husband and I are not opposed to new development.
We have been asked to give our views and feedback and we do hope we have a voice.
We enjoy living at 14 Erskine Lane and we hope you appreciate our valid concerns and thank you for listening Sylvia.
Thank you for calling.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Bye now.
Your worship, we do have another caller.
Caller with the last four digits of six five two three.
Last four digits six five two three.
It's last four digits of six five two three.
Okay, one one last time.
Caller with the last four digits of six five two three.
Hello.
Okay, hello.
Hello.
Hello.
Very good.
Uh your worship, that caller needs to mute their live web stream, or or we will have some uh echoing sound.
Okay, okay.
Are you able to mute your live web stream before you speak with us?
Caller.
Uh they they have muted their they have muted their phone.
Or they are muted again, maybe perhaps until they do.
We might want to um go on or circle back to the last four digits five five one three.
Um if if they would like to uh if you would like to call on them.
Okay.
So just a refresher for everyone on the line, you do need to press star six to to unmute yourself um and you do need to mute your live webcast in order to avoid feedback and we also ask you not to use speaker phone to ensure sound quality um I know it's all difficult it's it's difficult for us too but it is actually working quite well and that you're you're able to speak to us directly so caller with the last four digits five five one three hello?
Hello.
Yes, hello.
So just before you start, what what is the last four digits of your phone number, ma'am digits well it's less than six five two three?
Okay.
Thank you.
So if you can just give us your name and address.
Yes, it's Joanne Adams.
I am currently living in the premises at number nine Erskine Lane.
It is my mother's property.
And um I like to say that um all of the requests that have been issued and addressed by the concerns of people within the neighborhood and everything have been addressed if um they would like to look at the plans and what the developer has put through.
Um sidewalks, um traffic control, um, you name it.
They've basically got the um forest is gonna be left.
Um they've done the parking arrangements, and I think it would be a beautiful place and a big asset to the town of Uroy.
Um we've been there, it's been within our family for years.
If anybody's taken the time to read the letter that we put in and the stuff that's been put forward, um, I can't see anything going wrong with it.
It'll the roads are gonna be widened.
Um doesn't matter what goes in, we're gonna have blasting going on, whether it be townhouses, any of that stuff.
I looked after the property.
Um it was like a park for everybody up and down the street, but time goes on.
Um over the years I came back to look after my mother.
It needs to move on and the property should be developed.
It's been in the plans and the works um for many a year.
Okay, then thank you very much for calling in.
And the developer will be making a presentation later where everybody will will be able to see the the latest plans.
Yeah.
Um I'm quite sure the people will be pleased to see what they've done and how they've listened to comments that have come in and taken into consideration all of the people and what needs to be done.
And I think that people will be much more safer with what they're putting in than what we have on Erskine Lane right now because there is no traffic um walkways for anybody.
And I see the daycare kids coming up and down and they're walking on the streets.
And this way with whatever goes in, they're gonna have the sidewalks.
Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you for calling.
Good night.
Bye now.
So call her with the last four digits of five five one three.
Are are you still on the line and would like to speak?
5513.
So I'll take that as a no.
Is there anyone else stuff?
Your worship, I don't have any new callers.
Um Julie may have some chat comments.
Okay, thank you.
Yes, Mr.
Mayor, I have a comment from L.
Mueller from number 44 at 14 Erskine Lane.
Uh his comment is I echo and support Ms.
Gilbert's summation of resident concerns.
The new plan still does not speak of how they will manage the existing forests on that lot.
And secondly, the proposed roundabout, what study was done to support this versus traffic control.
Finally, most residents in Stone Ridge who wish to access the galloping goose do so via Erskine Lane.
It needs to be widened with sidewalks and a bike lane if possible, as strollers, kids, and young cyclists are narrowly avoided by vehicles unfamiliar with the area.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you, Julie.
Is there any anybody else in the chat function or just the one?
Nope, there are no more comments.
No more calls.
That is correct.
Okay.
Thank you.
At this time we have no new callers.
Okay, thank you.
So I'm thank you, callers, for calling it in.
It is um it's important for us to hear from you, and we're all getting used to this.
Um, but it's working quite well.
So we're gonna move Council Rogers.
Yes, you worship um uh eight to in the petition delegations.
There was a couple of emails.
Should we uh move the sheet?
Um, I think they're probably in the other cars, but but sure.
Yeah, yeah.
I move the shade of the email corresponding.
Okay.
All in favor, opposed, that's carried.
So we're gonna move.
There's nothing on parks, recreation, environment.
So we're gonna move right to planning and development.
And for the people watching the live stream, Councillor Matson is um was not feeling too well today, so he took the precaution, which we all appreciate, of not coming to the meeting, but he is actually on the meeting on telephone.
So he did hear all your comments, and he'll be taking part in the meeting by telephone.
But I'm going to chair planning and development.
Um, so the very first thing is the town of Uroyal housing gaps and needs.
Councillor Matson, you had concerns about this.
Did you want to defer this until the the next committee of the whole when you're present?
Councillor Matson, are you there?
I'm happy to a deferred if we just I think something's your worship councillor Matson is there.
He just needs to press star six to unmute his phone in Teams as well as unmute his phone on his device.
Councillor Matson, you need to press star six to unmute yourself, please.
Also feel free to text me as well.
I didn't do that the first time, but okay.
So can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
Yeah, it would be good to defer it.
Uh I would be happy.
Yeah, talk about it next week.
But it'd be better off if I was there in person.
Basically, it was how this would be used by us in the future.
That was the discussion.
So that's a motion then to defer it to the October Committee of the Whole.
Correct.
Okay, so do you second it by Councillor Rogers?
Okay.
All in favor?
Opposed.
That's carried.
Thank you, Ron.
So moving on to nineers can lane.
So can I just get a little briefing on on how we can do this?
Is the developer planning on making a presentation?
Oh, right, it's all here.
So staff presentation and then the consult consultant presentation.
Okay, staff.
Uh I'm a community planner here.
Thank you, you worship.
This is James Davison.
Can you all hear me?
We can.
Okay.
I will share my screen here with the PowerPoint presentation.
Hoping you can now see my PowerPoint.
Yep, we can.
Great.
So I'm introducing the rezoning for nine Erskine Lane.
As mentioned, this is a second application which the developer has feels they have addressed the concerns that came forward with the first application.
We have an air photo here showing the location of the site.
There's two properties split by CRD water right of way.
Purpose of the report obviously is to introduce a new application to resonance 9 Erskine Lane.
There's the proposal is now four five-story buildings, 336 units, which is down some, and a total of 1.22 FSR for both uh the developer refers to it as lot A and lot B.
The summary here, this application changes the proposal from initially it was a RM3 uh rezoning, which will now be a comprehensive district zoning, a CD zone.
And the zone will be drafted for readings of the bylaw when those come up.
So essentially the buildings are a little shorter.
All four buildings are now proposed at five stories and approximately 15 meters tall, as opposed to the previous application, as earlier mentioned, with two five-story and two six-story buildings between 15.5 and 18.2 meters tall.
Landscaping plan enables the retention of approximately 40% of the current tree canopy, along with the proposal by the applicant to plant approximately 250 trees.
The details of this site coverage will be looked at in more detail if this application comes to a form and character development permit.
The density has gone from 1.35 in the previous application to 1.22 FSR for the two lots.
Proposals now for sidewalks on both Erskine and Watkis Way.
The construction of a bus pad and excuse me, a bus pad, uh bus stop.
Roundabout, the developer has offered to construct roundabout at Watkins Walkis Way and Erskine Lane, as well as widening Erskine Lane.
The proposal is now for two-story underground parking.
The last application had single story underground parking.
20-year rental housing covenant is proposed, which means that the property will be covenanted to be only rental housing for at least 20 years.
And pre rock pre-wiring for electric vehicle charging for all parking space and provision of four car share cars, so one per building.
Of proposal for provision of a play structure.
On-site play structure would not likely be able to be accessed by the public, whereas a park at the nearby game Nature Park would be accessible to all, but that park would have to go us undergo a significant change in order to be viable as it is primarily natural at the moment.
As far as unit mix goes, 16 studio units, 161 bedroom units, 122 bedroom units, and 43 bedroom units are proposed.
The unit mix can possibly change between the rezoning and the form of character development permit.
However, that is what is proposed currently.
We have a table here.
I won't go through everything, but it describes in more detail the differences between lot A, proposed lot A, proposed lot B, proposed combined, as well as the previously proposed numbers here from the last application.
We can go back to this if necessary.
This is currently calculated from the base of the building.
It's a little bit different to the way we calculate height as far as average grades for the building, and this will be looked at in more detail again at the form and character development permit stage.
Excuse me.
Really, uh staff staff is supportive of this application.
The proposed zoning can be supported because it complies the policies encouraging the growth of the hospital neighborhood center.
It is described as a growth area within our official community plan.
There's lots of development in that area, yes, but it is all designed to support each other.
Higher density at this neighborhood center promotes walkability, promotes cycling with the galloping goose there.
Uh transit will be improved with that with that bus stop.
Um really it is designed to increase rental residential uses.
Um staff is really excited about uh dedicated rental housing in town.
We don't have much of it, and more dedicated rental housing is uh is a significant OCP goal and it provides stability of housing for people.
Uh community amenity contributions are proposed in a significant way that can be used to fund local improvements to enhance pedestrian safety and neighborhood quality of life.
So there's building height and design talking about design here.
You can see another section in a more site-specific context.
So the buildings are likely to be sunk in in portions and and may perhaps raised up in portions as well.
We have uh current materials here.
Again, this will be looked at in more detail at the form of character development permit stage.
Have a transportation impact.
We have our transportation engineer or excuse me our town engineer also on the line, Kevin Boveys, who's perhaps more familiar with engineering aspect of this.
The updated transportation impact assessment concluded that the development would not significantly impact the Walkas Way Erskine land intersections current level of service.
However, the developer will provide sidewalk along both Erskine and WAKIS.
The applicant is implementing what we call traffic demand management strategies to reduce vehicle use, including car share, electric bicycle share, and the sidewalks.
Roundabout at the intersection of WACIS and Erskine as previously discussed.
So the site servicing is in the engineer's opinion not an issue.
Tree protection.
Tree protection obviously a large issue on site.
The picture, the the image at the top here is the current proposal, whereas the previous proposals down here.
Surface parking and the reconfiguration of the buildings allows for approximately 40% of pre-retention on site.
And again, this will be looked at in more detail at the form and character development permit area.
There's a section in the report on bird habitat, bird habitat in the trees.
There were was a potentially a cooper's hawk or raven nest within that area.
If we need to come back to bird habitat, we can do that.
No part of the site is subject to the riparian areas regulation.
Geotechnical report doesn't indicate anything out of the ordinary.
And electric vehicle charging stations, our zoning bylaw requires one electric vehicle charging station on the lot, and the development concept would provide pre-wiring for every parking spot.
So quite an improvement.
There's a public engagement summary here.
Obviously, in this time of COVID that we're living, it has been more difficult to do more recent public engagement.
Staff feels that the prior public engagement has really informed this current application.
Our official community plan recommends a contribution to the Regional Housing Trust Fund, and other viable solutions include the Game Nature Park improvements and pedestrian and cycling improvements in the area.
So, really to analyze this, uh, the applicant has responded in a significant way to council and public improvement uh input from the last application.
Uh less units, lower density, lower height, more underground parking, revised site layout proposed, and other small refinements.
We do see the adjacent property uh at seven Erskine has been rezoned to a higher maximum density and a similar building height as as this application.
So it does suit what has already been approved in the the area and does meet our official community plan land use uh and density.
The application is consistent with the OCP, uh it offers a robust community amenity contribution, meets the hospital neighborhood center goals, and really in staff's opinion offers a sustainable approach to development, and staff is supportive of the application.
Thank you.
Thank you, staff.
Um, do we want to ask questions of staff now, or shall we listen to the presenter?
I don't have a good question.
Okay, so councillor Lemmon, go ahead.
Thank you.
Um James, can you remind me of the what the zoning is for number seven?
Zoning is RM3 for seven.
Okay, so uh CD or comprehensive development is a uh less provides less density.
Why would we go C D three?
C D because the uh the the density and the height of the buildings really doesn't fit into any current um zone that we have off on the shelf, so to speak.
So RM1, RM2, RM3 doesn't quite work.
RM3 is potentially too high.
Lindsay has a question here.
Okay.
I think we we just did a comprehensive development for Eagles Nest, didn't we?
As well.
Yeah, it it it essentially provides the opportunity for a custom zone and for the for staff to to refine the zone to meet the proposal such that uh it is much closer than our off the shelf or excuse me, on the shelf zones like RM3.
Okay, good.
Thank you.
One more one more quick question.
And um trees we we have a policy in view royal that if you remove a tree you have to put two you know two have to be put in to replace it would there be 125 trees removed and we're being these and 250 would be put in to replace or do we do we actually know how many trees would be removed at the moment uh I'm not sure of the exact number we do have a report in on the agenda uh including an Arbor's report which itemizes all the trees.
Again, uh that is likely to change a little bit when we come to the form of character development permits and the refinements that often occur on site.
So the development permits would identify trees removed, trees kept.
Okay, thank you, James.
Councillor Rogers.
Yes, sir.
Thank you very much.
Uh thanks, Staff.
A question on the uh uh you dare me what page.
Um it was the chart, it was we had the um the unit mix.
Now I'm looking at that.
Um we had um uh a table that shows your mic going.
Oh, yeah, exactly.
Okay, sorry.
We had a table of proposed lot A, lot B, proposed combined, proposed previous.
Do you remember you know that table there?
Yes, yes, I'm looking at it right now.
Okay, great.
Uh and there was the uh the line or the yeah, the row site coverage.
And it sounds like or looks like the the site coverage uh is the same between the proposed combined and the previous combined.
Um is that the site?
So if the buildings are smaller and we have less blacktop, uh can you help me understand how that could be the same if we're getting 40 percent protection of tree canopy?
Uh that is a good question.
I will have to double check the previously proposed site coverage.
What what page are you on, Councillor Rogers?
It's uh this this it was the staff's report.
Um, and it was the unit mix and he provided the table that was uh site coverage.
So you know it would be helpful just to get some clarification on that.
It looked like it's the same.
Right.
And um from my recollection perhaps the applicant can help me on this but I I understood that uh there were about 1400 trees that were uh in the initial proposal that were destined to come down uh if it was just a single parkade um and then the 250 trees was uh for the widening of the road and and the compensation for those those trees doubling 125 coming down and doubling that would be 250.
So uh yeah, it would be interesting to know um extrapolate uh how many.
I think perhaps staff and and the applicant could uh give some sense of how many trees um we're likely to preserve on this, even in a in a rough sense.
When this comes uh through through through your worship, uh when this comes forward uh for readings, uh we can provide a more robust illustration of of these these issues.
Thank you.
Good for now, Councillor Kwovich?
Okay.
And I think Councillor Mattson, you're good for now, Councillor Mattson.
Um no, I could have a question.
You say you do or you don't.
Sounds like a beetle tune, but yeah, I have a question.
Okay, go ahead.
So one of my concerns is um I'm just wondering how this has changed significantly significantly enough to actually even be have a proposal that for them to be able to submit a proposal because it for the most part it's it's it's looks like the same project except that they've added some amenities that they didn't have uh in the first time.
So if you could explain that, I'd how how would this meet sort of the the intent of the you know or not our bylaw but the legislation since something coming back within six months if it's is not significantly different so who would like to tackle that one CAO Anima?
Your worship the um staff reviewed the proposal in the context of the original and concluded that this project is vastly different.
And that being the case, it is a new application, it's not the same application.
The number of stories is different, the footprint is different, the number of trees preserved is different, the proposal for additional infrastructure is more significant, and so this is a new proposal.
And and it was a completely new application.
Yeah, there wasn't the old one modified.
That's correct.
So that's it, it's was staff's opinion, Councillor Mattson, that um this was a completely new application.
I I understand what staff said.
Just in case you didn't hear, that's all.
So anything else?
Any follow up or not in terms of questions of staff at this point, but certainly in when it comes to discussion, I'll have comments.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So we're going to move on to the I believe we have uh a representative of the proponent on the line, and we're we're going to move on to their presentation.
Hello.
Is the proponent there?
Hello.
Hello.
Hi.
Hi.
I our video is not working, so we're not really sure how this is going to go.
Um I had sent the presentation for earlier, so you might have access to it.
To which?
Oh.
I think I think James might need to um control it from his end.
Yeah, we do have it, so you you can um you can work through that for sure.
Maybe the public.
I think the public can actually if it's on, yeah, there we go.
Okay.
So good evening, your worship and members of council.
My name is Sarah Alexander, and I'm the director of development for West Urban Development.
And I'm joined by Sean Roy, our CEO, Terry Hoff, our CEO, and we had planned to have Tanis Schulte, our our architect, online as well, but because I'm using my phone, we can't have her on speakerphone at the same time.
So bear with me.
Our brief presentation will include an overview of the planning considerations and feedback, details of our proposal, the transportation solutions, and a summary of key benefits.
That's slide two.
Slide three.
Planning and feedback.
Slide four.
The site context demonstrates that nine Erskine Lane is identified as an area for development.
The View Royal OCP identifies the property as an area for higher density housing as part of the hospital neighborhood center.
The CRD has identified it in a growth node due to its proximity to the Victoria General Hospital, and it is close to amenities such as the Galloping Goose Regional Trail.
Next slide, slide five.
Slide six.
As you can see, there have been many events where we listened and learned.
Our previous application was submitted in January, and we held open houses in January and March to gather feedback from the community.
We went to Committee of the Whole in March and listened to Council's discussion.
Due to COVID concerns, we held individual meetings from March to June and created a website that included the changes and updated proposal in preparation for the council meeting in July.
We listened to council's discussion and reasons why the application was rejected in July.
After careful consideration of these concerns, we submitted a new application in August.
In September, we heard from a few members of the community and incorporated their concerns.
And then based on today's discussion, we plan to meet with the community again when our application proceeds to first and second reading.
Slide seven.
The feedback we received from council included the need for intersection, transportation and traffic improvements, changes to underground parking and tree impacts, reducing density and height, providing affordable housing, including a green space buffer, including electric vehicle charging stations, including car share, considering pedestrian safety, and uses for the community amenity contribution.
The feedback we received from the community included the need for intersection, transportation and traffic improvements and streetlights, parking for tenants and visitors, and on street parking concerns, pedestrian safety, playground and green space buffer, tree impacts in the environment, affordable housing, including electric vehicle charging stations, the need for sidewalks and road widening, and these comments, most of them were reared reiterated again today.
Slide nine.
In our new application, West Urban has absolutely addressed every concern raised by the neighborhood and council with this new design.
We are proposing a development that intends to preserve this beautiful piece of land and at the same time provide the diversified needs of housing in the growing community of View Royal.
You asked for affordable housing.
We will guarantee 20 years of rental units, and 10% will be affordable to address the View Royal Housing Needs Assessment Report.
You asked for community amenities.
We will provide a play structure on site and pay nearly $1.2 million in community amenity contributions.
You asked for pedestrian improvements and access.
We will construct sidewalks on Erskine and Watkiss and increase safety for pedestrians along the CRD right of way through SEPTED principles.
You asked for transportation improvements.
We will construct the roundabout at Watkiss and Erskine and complete road upgrades on Erskine.
You asked for reduced density and height.
We reduced the density from 1.35 to 1.22 FSR and the height from six down to five stories.
You asked for privacy and a buffer.
We've shifted and rotated buildings to create a green space buffer for privacy and protection of the urban forest.
You asked for reduced tree impacts.
We will save 428 trees, plant 250 trees, and develop on only 25% of the site.
An urban forest will be created with nearly 700 trees on site, and 75% of the site will remain in a natural state.
You asked for electric vehicle potential.
We will ensure the four buildings are fully wired for electrical charging stations and provide 28 charging stations.
You asked for revised underground parking.
We consented, and despite the cost to West Urban, we have provided two levels of parking under all four buildings.
This decreased surface parking and saved the majority of trees and natural habitat on site.
You asked for environmental solutions.
We will provide four electric car share vehicles, bike share, and one year of transipes.
We have also created an urban forest for increased permeability and carbon capture.
All of this has been provided to create an absolutely unique and innovative approach to the potential development of this site.
Next slide.
In September, a letter from the landowner was sent to council.
They indicate that our current proposal goes above and beyond to meet the needs of the community of U Royal, and I will now read part of that letter.
West Urban has listened, taken into consideration, and cooperated fully with View Royal's requirements, requests, and suggestions, redesigning, amending, and redrafting their plans, as well as providing service upgrades, sidewalks, community park, tree replacement programs, significant setback changes, and much more.
We truly feel they have done everything and then some to make us an incredible, community-minded standout project within the town's hospital city center, and will be providing much needed housing, rental, accommodation within a municipality that needs it.
Please keep in mind that we too, as a family, stood and watched as every tree was taken down on our quiet little street to allow for a townhouse project in the mid 1990s.
We knew then, and we know now that everything changes with time and communities grow.
Hospitals are built, highways are constructed, amenities are required, and housing developments are desperately needed.
We know this as we've seen the changes and growth that have taken place in our community of U Royal over the last 60 plus years.
Slide 11.
Our proposal.
And slide 12.
To fully appreciate the changes, we have compared our previous application to our new application.
As you can see in the renderings, the new proposal includes significantly more trees and green space.
Slide 13.
We have provided two levels of underground parking that are located under the buildings.
The buildings have also been moved and rotated.
These changes were made to maximize green space on the site.
You can see in the top image showing the previous application and the parking that covers the trees will cover most of the building along the the borders to include privacy and the underground parking structure, which is two levels uh will will significant is significantly smaller, as you can see slide 14 the changes to the underground will enable the creation of an urban urban urban forest where only 25% of the land will be developed as you can see on these renderings where the top rendering showed the previous development that was unable to have a lot of trees because of the underground parking structure and the current application with the two levels of parking and significantly less underground development will allow the protection of a significant number of trees, and then we'll also be able to plant more trees in addition to those.
Slide 15.
The building heights have been reduced from six stories to five stories for all four buildings, and the density has been reduced from 1.35 to 1.22 FSR.
The building placement also enables significant green space buffer for neighboring properties for increased privacy.
This is shown if you look to the right of the page, you can see that there's significant green space between nine Erskine Lane and seven Erskine Lane.
And then looking to the left of the page, you'll notice that there's quite a few more trees in front of the building in our current application, whereas in the previous application, all of those trees were removed.
Slide 16.
We will also provide 28 electric vehicle charging stations and wire the full building for future stations.
We will contribute nearly $1.2 million in community many contributions.
And we will we will provide a play structure and an accessible Discovery Nature Walk on site.
Slide 17.
The transportation solutions.
To address the environmental traffic and safety concerns that were again mentioned today, our proposal includes the construction of a roundabout, bus stop, and sidewalks at Erskine and Watkiss, road widening and upgrades on Erskine, bike share, transit passes, car share and electric vehicle charging stations for tenants, and safe pedestrian access to the Victoria General Hospital through SEPTED Principles.
And as mentioned today, if there is a desire to have upgrades to the CRD pathway, we're willing to pay for those upgrades that would be needed.
Section, or sorry, slide 19, summary and benefits.
Purpose built rental has been identified as the most vital need in the View Royal Housing Needs Assessment Report.
Our development will provide 336 units of purpose-built rental.
Also, from the View Royal website, the purpose of an OCP is meant to give assurance to landowners and developers for areas of welcome change.
This property has been identified in the OCP as an area for increased residential growth and density.
Slide 21.
Our proposal absolutely aligns to the OCP policies and the housing needs assessment.
It will also provide nearly $1.2 million in community many contributions.
West Urban will provide a play structure, create an urban forest, ensure privacy for neighbors, and safe pedestrian access.
We will provide car share, bike share, transit passes, and electric vehicle charging stations.
We will also construct the roundabout at Watkiss and Erskine, which is the solution that was requested by View Royal.
Our proposal supports the implementation of View Royal's policies and provides direct community benefit.
It is a climate-sensitive design and provides transportation solutions for increased safety.
From our perspective, there has not been another development like this in View Royal.
The development demonstrates the true integration of the natural environment and great urban design.
Slide 22.
Based on today's discussion, we will update our website with our new development proposals and will provide opportunity for the community feedback through a series of community engagement and open houses to share our vision as we proceed to first and second reading.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you very much, and just hold for questions.
So quest questions from members of council, not probably statements at the moment.
Let's try and stick to questions and then we'll have a discussion.
Counselor Rogers.
Petition a bike lane, and I think the the rationale for that is so many families uh not only from Erskine Lane um uh strata but also from across the way and in River Stone Ridge.
Um and uh going up cycling up a hill in a narrow lane uh does present problems.
Um you know that's why we put bike lanes on our four-mile hill.
So I I noticed that in the in the design, and I guess this might be not only for the applicant but also for staff, um, as a instead of a 2.5 boulevard.
I'm hoping that um we would listen to the staff and or sorry, the um the folks um the residents and uh install a bike lane uphill.
So that that's um uh an observation from what uh folks have been talking about tonight.
Um they also um I'm hearing from the residents is that they would like um trees on Erskine Lane that would um provide a screening a barrier if you like from uh the development um uh the proposed development does does the trees include uh this the preservation of trees include uh screening and um along erskine lane okay i i can and i can say i i can attempt to answer two two questions the first question was about the uh potential construction of a bike lane yeah so we would be willing to provide that if there is rib available and the the town or the the staff bureau would need to confirm whether the that's that that is the case yeah we yeah we would need the cross deck to determine if there's space available and then we would be we'd be willing to put it in.
So and then and then to in terms of screening on Erskine Lane we've we've placed our buildings um quite far back in order to enable more privacy and more screening from the existing trees on site.
Okay.
So there is full screening already and and the the the desire of the community across the street to have additional screening the challenge with that is that it's private property.
So we can't really go in and put trees along their private property.
And I think um as was mentioned by one of the why one of the residents as well is that that the land is actually there's a right of way available for the sidewalk on that side of the street as well as well.
So it's it's it would be probably more uh view royals um or the staff's decisions as to whether screening should go in there.
Okay.
But it does look like that you're providing a sufficient screening.
I think the mayor just pointed out that it um on your side uh since the buildings are set back it looks like there is some uh screening and um uh from yeah that was absolutely that was our intent was to provide as much screening as possible yeah uh and uh thank you for the uh the new visuals uh that uh helps out a great deal um i would be interested um uh the next time when you guys come back or uh if your um artist renderings uh could also include views from um from erskan lane from watkiss way and uh from the hospital um particularly at the intersection of watkiss way and and uh and helmaken and that would uh just really give me a sense of of what trees you've and what screening um from all those different angles sure we can I can provide those okay could you also give me some details about your your you mentioned that you would be providing transit passes.
What's the details of that?
So what we've done on other sites is we provided uh the equivalent of an annual transit pass for every resident uh for one year to really encourage transit um use.
And um and the details of that would be developed as part of the development permit and building permit applications.
Okay, yeah, that's good for one year.
That's that's fine.
Um, you know, the uh the one thing that uh is also on the um the residents' petition is uh a community playground that's accessible uh for all by all.
And um the one um improvement I would like to see in your your proposal is uh the way you've uh you're proposing the playground right now on lot B between the two buildings doesn't really make it that accessible for uh the children that play in lot A.
And it seems to me that uh if you place the playground um along the uh hospital trail in that new green space that you've got along the trail, then that would be accessible both for your um children of lot A and lot B.
It would be in the middle.
And yeah, thanks for the suggestion.
Um our our the reason why we put the the uh place the play structure on that on lot B is because that's on top of um an area where uh where we can't plant trees because of the underground parkade.
So that that lot was specifically chosen.
Um and we did contact viewworld to see if there was an some land available where we could place a a place structure that could be publicly available uh and the the suggestion was to use the um the game road site um but uh since then we've heard that it's a natural area and it's going to remain that way um the challenge with putting it in the CRD uh right of way is that that also is private property that doesn't belong to us so we can't we can't necessarily uh we can't include a uh it's also a utility right of way so we can't include a permanent structure in that property.
Uh no and I'm and let me clarify.
I'm not suggesting that we place it in the um uh the right-of-way.
I'm suggesting you place it beside the right-of-way.
So if you look at lot A, you've got the two buildings and you've got the large green space, you know, that um seems to me because you know, we if if to put a playground in in um uh Game Road Park means that we would have to take out a number of trees.
Um so so I I suspect, I mean, obviously there's a willingness to work together.
Yeah, and I think that those details could, I mean the CRD may even possibly be amenable on the water right away.
You don't know.
Yeah, 100% we'll work with you on whatever wherever you want the that uh play structure to be located.
In in game park, um several acres of game park, I think are covered by blackberries, not trees.
So I I suspect there's probably some spots that we could find.
It yeah, there are spots, and and uh you know, I guess what we'd be looking for is a is a playground that's accessible for um for all the the residents that will be on on lot nine, lot seven, and even future residents on lot two.
So it's it makes sense, and we'd be willing to donate the play structure to few royals, but it is accessible to everyone.
Yeah.
Anyway, um, I'm really impressed with um how much you've uh addressed the concerns.
Um you've you've taken care of it very systematically.
Um I think you've also included the number of uh trees that would be uh protected.
So um at this point, um I am pleased.
Thank you.
Thank you.
On my left, questions.
No questions, you worship.
Thank you.
Okay.
Councillor Kwalovich.
So your worship just we'll stick to questions now and then have some discussion after.
Yeah.
What is the actual setback from Erskine Lane to the well to any of the buildings in in meters?
Do we do we know that?
I can't find that in your um in the consultant presentation.
And that it's uh just a question I have.
Does anyone have that info?
James, would you have that?
That info.
I have that information in the architectural uh drawings I have to actually pull them up.
Just one second.
Okay, okay.
Well uh your worship, this is James.
Um while Sarah is doing that, I uh I will remind council that um that detail will be sorted with our CD zone, which we don't have drafted yet.
So it it could potentially um change or be varied at the time of development permit.
Okay, right.
I think yeah, I think Council Kowalovich is just trying to get kind of uh an idea of how far back from the road the corner of the building is.
Exactly.
Understood.
Buildings, yeah.
What's what's building is well, to be honest with you, both of the buildings that are on the end, the the book ends, um appear to be probably closest to Erskine.
Um and I'm just looking for the setback of those two.
I I think the obviously the two middle buildings are they look like they're set back.
Uh well, especially the second significantly, but uh the two bookends are um just my concern right now.
I do see some some I what I think is some screening.
Um I'm not sure what it is.
So is that information easily accessible?
Absolutely.
Yeah, we'll contact our architect.
Um the the drawings do show that um our building is placed uh back from the setback.
The challenge on this site is that um because of the way the topography is, the building cannot be that that close to the current set like to the current property line.
It needs to be moved back from the site.
So we'll we'll get that number for you.
Okay, thank you.
Okay.
And I also am interested in hearing more about your subtext principles in relation to the CRD uh water line.
I've been to the site several times.
I'm well aware that the trail is regularly used, and obviously now it's uh it's probably not lit at all, uh, other than some ambient lighting from uh Victoria General Hospital.
Uh but I'm just wondering what you meant by uh subtein principles and what you do to plan to improve that.
Oh, we have sorry, we on the last question we have the setback.
Our architect it set provided it.
It's an eight, it's the closest setback is eight meters from the property line.
Everything else is further back from that.
Wow.
Okay.
Okay, thank you.
That's okay.
Yeah.
And the uh in terms of setback principles, we were really focusing on more eyes on the street.
Um, by having this property developed, it actually increases safety by having um more eyes watching and seeing who's going through this area to help um, you know, ensure safety of people like passing through this site.
Okay.
Is that your only septhead principle that you're referring to?
Is this the basically the building that parallels the trail?
I think if I can just interject, James, is it not a requirement of our process that they there be a report on septeb principles in the design?
Uh it is thank you, your worship.
It is uh typically a included section within our development permit, uh form and character development permit.
Oh, okay.
So uh to be continued, but I'm I'm definitely interested in in hearing uh robust plan going forward on that, wherever this may go.
Um and just back to question number one, can you elaborate on the eight meters in which building?
I'm assuming it's A.
Yeah, it's I think it's building A.
It is building A.
Okay.
And what's setback for building D?
Lots more than because you said eight meters is the closest one, right?
It would be ten point five meters.
Okay.
So can I just get a clarification?
Sure.
Remembering that these are just as as James said, right?
The those are gonna get ironed down later.
I mean, it's more the land use tonight than yeah, go ahead.
Yeah.
Uh well, I just the 25 meters.
I I think what I'm hearing there, that was um building D um separation from lot seven.
Oh no, that's that's from the road.
Yeah, we were we were talking about the setbacks from yeah.
Okay, from the first.
Yeah, okay.
That's fine.
Thank you.
Yeah, you good.
Yeah.
Okay.
So councillor Matson, did you have any questions or are you still waiting for opinions?
No, I was I I did send you a note saying I was gonna ask a question.
I did uh just one one simple question.
Oh so that's okay.
Uh in terms of tree retention, now if you're placing 250 new trees, does that mean you're taking out 125?
Yes, as per the tree retention bylaw, you have to replace two to one for all the trees that are removed outside of the building um footprint.
So we will be replacing the 150 trees.
Sure.
Um the other one of the concerns I'd heard from residents was was just simply the tree loss and the importance of that area.
And so if you could describe to us or give me an idea of the the trees that are being taken out, like how they compare to the rest of the trees on the property, like for example, is this you know the area, the biggest and the most beautiful trees uh that are getting taken out, or are they the similar to trees across the the whole site?
Yeah, we tried to place the buildings in the site where um there would be the least impact on the trees.
The trees that will be retained will be more of the old older growth trees.
That was the intent of the placement.
Okay, does that mean that the trees that are going to be removed are are are lesser?
Well, lesser lesser in size, like the yeah, like we all of the details of the types of trees are shown in the um the tree um management report that was included as part of our application.
And so we tried to preserve the most valuable trees on site.
Okay.
All right thank you.
Yeah and just to fall back to to go back to the previous question about the setback the distance between uh building D and then seven Erskine Lane is 20 meters, 20 meters, which is which allows there to be a nice green space buffer along the side there with protection of many trees.
Okay.
Thank you.
Councilor Rogers.
Thank you.
Just a point of clarification.
I was just uh reading the details on your report there.
Um we talk about and and in the report staff report, it talked about 40% of the trees being retained, and yet somewhere in your report you mentioned that um uh 75% of the um uh lot will be undeveloped.
So if you're if you're you've got 75% undeveloped, isn't that logical then that you'd have seven-five percent uh tree retention?
Yeah, that's a good point.
It's also real so the 25% right relates to the developed area based on the building footprint, and the tree retention is based on the full site development.
Um part of the trees that would be taken out are actually due to the road widening.
This is a significant number of the trees come out because of the road widening, the sidewalk that have to go in along the front of uh of the development site along Erskine Lane.
And so that's where the the discrepancy between the number of trees that we being retained and and it's not it's not a it's not a perfect ratio between the development area and the number of trees that would be retained because they're not they're not necessarily evenly dispersed across the site.
Okay, I'll have to get my head around that.
Thank you.
So I have a just a couple of questions.
On on the 10% affordable units, um West Urban is prepared to do 10% of the units at at BC Housing's formula of affordable housing.
Yes, that's correct.
And and you would be comfortable with having an outside agency of some sort deal with that.
I don't mean running.
Sorry, go ahead.
Sorry, you mean that you mean manage the property for those 10%?
Well, I mean, I'm not sure of those details.
I know the CRD has has entered into a a program now where they can certainly help you help municipalities.
Yeah, we we work with the CRG, we would manage the building ourselves.
Right, but they they could be rented, yeah, through through the the affordable housing registry though yeah sure that sounds good yeah okay and and is it West urban's intention should this be approved is it West Urban's intention to retain the building and run it absolutely that's that's our that's absolutely our intention okay yeah we do that for all the buildings currently okay well thank you for your presentation I don't think there's any more questions so we will um discuss it now and if there are any more questions we shall ask them thank you so who'd like to start i mean we just need to give a brief idea of whether you know we're comfortable with this moving to the next stage of of bylaw preparation and then obviously it'll be back on another agenda and I think the proponent would do some sort of open house with the community in the meantime as well.
Councillor Rogers thank you uh yes um like I've said before it's um this is a hugely significant um improvement over the uh previous two designs and and I appreciate the applicant and staff uh working together on this uh you've hit many of the high points um um you know both in terms of uh the tree protection the environmental considerations um um and you know we'll get into the final points of of uh build and design later on in in the next phase and uh as you know I'm still wanting to sort out um uh about a playground that uh is accessible um um by all and I think we can work that out to everyone's satisfaction in in an ideal world um if we had lot two playing on uh you know which is the the gravel pit uh at uh between hospital way and hosp the uh hospital and and you folks you know if we had that uh in play um you know and this is just an editorial comment for myself I would have been more than happy to have a uh FSR of three 3.5 on lot two and put all the buildings on on lot two in a combined effort and uh and preserve this remarkable forest but at this point i don't think the uh owners of lot two are interested in participating in any uh any of this so um i think there's there's still finer points i um i want to go through your presentation a lot more uh in detail i encourage you to um uh to reach out to um uh the the folks in erskine lane and uh stone ridge um uh and so that they can respond to this uh you know their concerns and um uh one of the things i i think we should uh do, your worship, is refer this to the advisory committees as a um for their input as well in terms of the due process.
Thank you.
Thank you.
On my left.
Sure.
In general, for me, it's still a lot of density on a small narrow road.
However, I appreciate that you, the applicant, have really taken on board what we've we've said at particularly the last meeting, and that point by point you've you've addressed those points.
I I met with the uh with some residents of Erskine Lane just last week and uh walked around the area and uh many of the points that they brought up you've addressed so I look forward to speaking with them and hearing from them and uh hearing their comfort level again but um you know well done thank you for listening and um and and um applying what you heard so thank you counselor Kowalovich thank you just a couple comments for my colleagues uh I would like to make it very clear that uh I am in support of a playground that is not on this site.
I 100% a playground, uh support a playground that is available to all VRL residents.
I don't support just a playground on the property, although if they choose to build one for the residents and one for us, that's fine.
But uh if the playground is going to be built, I can only support it for everybody.
Uh obviously the game uh road area with the blackberry bushes is is an ideal location.
And with this area growing, it's um it's a must for me.
Um I'm very proud of the nature walk on the site and the fact that it's accessible.
To me, that is uh very progressive, and it's something that I think can benefit people there.
Uh and it's a huge selling feature for me, even as a counselor supporting this project, um, giving some people some green space within the that area.
Um I'm I I will note that just in general, this this area is so critical to to View Royal.
It's uh it's probably well, it is our emerging area when it comes to growth, and this is going to get very busy, Erskine Lane.
Uh, you're going to have two concurrent projects at once, and then you're going to have the other landowners in the area who are potentially waiting for this to happen, come out of the pun, come out of the woodwork.
Because now some uh infrastructure will have been built and it would it would seem um very reasonable for them to begin uh the process of of potentially developing.
So I just I really think um considering this is arguably will be the largest of of the group, we need to tread very lightly when it comes to uh transportation infrastructure.
Council Rogers, I I fully support a bike lane here.
I don't know how it's gonna get done, but it seems pretty obvious to me that with this many people living on a road that goes directly to the galloping goose, that it's a must.
Uh whether it goes on the other side of the road, I don't know where it's going to go.
I I don't know.
But it needs to it needs to go somewhere.
The pedestrian access here and egress and and safety needs to be at the highest level.
Not only for the long run, but I can foresee you know many, many months over construction here, right?
And um it's it's a big deal for me.
And I know that's a huge concern for the residents is that oh my goodness like this is we're gonna have uh dump trucks and loaders and trees coming down and probably some blasting for sure.
So um it's that's something for us to talk about.
Uh and then the other the last thing I'll say that um I know is a concern for the group, because I I was on the site as well, spoke to the representative from Westrada um across the street, and they're they're concerned about the uh imposing nature of the buildings that are close to Erskine.
So eight meters to me is um it is tight.
It it is to to to the road, and it's something that I'm um I'm alive to, and I'd just be interested in maybe uh getting getting staff's opinion on um, you know, where that kind of fits in with other developments that'd be similar to this.
I know it's tough in VRL because we don't have this type of landscape, and comparing it to like a busy uh road isn't fair, but um anyways those are and yeah, and then positively it obviously fits with with the um the area.
We've talked about this as a group that we want to get it more dense.
It's near the largest employer in the South Island or one of the largest employers, the hospital.
Uh it's it's near the galloping goose, it's uh close to the highway.
So it takes all those boxes for higher density.
So I'm comfortable that way.
Um, but I do have some reservations still um that I'd like to see addressed.
Thank you.
Okay, thanks, Councillor Kowalovich.
Councillor Matson on the land use issues before us tonight.
Right.
You know, uh first off I wanted to uh compliment the uh proponents for uh in their presentation meeting a lot of the things that we we'd asked for.
If we want and that's if we wanted it at a density of, you know, 325 units or for whatever it is, putting that high a density.
I'm still uh a bit at odds here with uh I mean I just don't know if this is gonna be a how this will be in key I don't think it's in keeping with the you know the height of the buildings and the the number of units and what it's gonna do to that the road and the impact on the existing residents.
I'm still not comfortable and so I still need to be shown uh or or convinced that it's actually in the best interest of the residents um to put that high a density in, you know, irrespective of the the amenities or or the improvements that they're planning to put in because basically those are sort of the minimal things that we need to do to actually make this project work at all.
So while I think they put in the items needed to make the project work.
The question for me is do we actually is it actually a an overall benefit to the town to have that high density and something that's basically not in keeping with that with the the adjacent residences.
And so I really will be looking forward to hearing from the residences in terms of you know sort of any final decisions I have on this project because at this point I'm still not convinced it's in the best interest of the community and what an extra several seven or eight hundred people uh in this area is actually going to do to our overall community.
So these are all things I'd like to see uh addressed and in my mind I I think the existing residents are really gonna help sway my vote in terms of you know this goes forward.
So those those are my main comments.
Thank you, Councillor Matson.
So I guess from me, I'm certainly supportive of moving this forward and going to bylaw readings, um which sets off the public process.
I I too, like Councillor Rogers, think it is uh vastly improved, and and I thank the proponent for the the work that you've done.
Um I I think this property calls for higher density development.
I mean, a one 1.2 FSR is is actually quite low.
Um, I think we need to remember that it's rental accommodation in in a region that's that's screaming out for rental accommodations.
And I mean, there's some jurisdictions, such as Kelowna, that that's the only commute that's considered the community amenity, is the fact that a developer is building rental accommodation.
Um, so it's probably worth considering that to a certain extent, because the that many rental units is is good for our town and good for our region.
The fact that they're prepared to do 10%, which will be 35 odd units at BC housing affordable rates is is also a boon for the town.
Um I I get the concerns.
Um I mean, the concerns about Erskine and the construction, I mean, those are all going to happen regardless of what's built there.
Um construction's going to take place and it's going to be disruptive.
And that's not really council's role, that's staff's role to manage it properly and put in plans in place and all those things are done.
Um and I have full confidence that they would be done.
But you can't build a project like that without some disruptions.
Um, so I'm fine with with moving it along, and I look forward to it coming back.
And I I look forward to hearing about the open house that the proponent will have with the residents as well before it comes back, I presume, which I think would be good to keep everybody informed of the the newer set of plans.
And with that, I think we just need a motion to receive everything, council number one, two, and three.
Thank you.
So moved by councillor Rogers, seconded by councillor Lemon.
We're all in favor of receipt.
Yep, opposed.
That's carried.
So next up we have um 275 Kerwood Street, the development permit.
Thank you, thank you, your worship.
Uh again, James Davison.
I hope you can all see my PowerPoint up here.
Uh development permit 2020.
This is the foreshore and uplands application at 275 Kerwood.
Just before you start, I mean, I guess you're gonna get to this question, but there's I mean, there's just the glaring question of when council rejected the boathouse.
Um why we would even begin to consider this.
Yeah, in in in short, um the the boat house is not part of this current application.
Yeah.
I'm getting a bad network quality uh so if I'm cutting out, please do let me know.
Um the the applicate the applicant is insisting that this uh the boathouse is uh a lawfully non-conforming structure.
Um staff is not of that opinion, and so this application doesn't include the boathouse, and the boathouse will have to be dealt with in a separate application or under a separate um process that will come forward at a later date.
So if council concurs with your position, uh then council just simply needs to state that tonight, then concurs with the staff position, that is, that the boathouse is not a separate issue.
So that is perhaps a discussion with uh Mr.
Anima as far as or or perhaps uh in camera as far as uh how how that is dealt with.
Okay, thank you.
Just let me just before you commence, and I'm sorry to cut you off, just councillor Mattson has a question.
Yes, thank you.
I understood what staff said, but my question is if we don't want to look at this proposal or development permit proposal until the boathouse issue is dealt with.
Yeah.
Is that our decision?
And is there any implications to our making that decision?
C A O Anima.
Your worship, the uh the implications may well be legal ones that ought to be debated in council in uh camera.
The um the issues that are in front of you can be considered.
Um both the applications on your agenda today include variances.
And while we may not have justification to reject these applications on the basis of the uh criteria, council can choose to accept or reject this application on the basis of the variance applied for.
Right.
Okay.
Does that answer your question, Councillor Mattson?
Would it be appropriate for me just to uh move our CAO's recommendation?
I'm not sure it was his recommendation.
I I think probably in fairness, we should hear the presentation and ask any pertinent questions, and then I I I certainly concur with you that I'm not going to consider supporting any variances at this point.
But I think probably we should go through the process.
Okay, thank you.
So, James, please go ahead.
Thank you, worship.
So, um, in regards to those variances, uh, the variance uh requested is a prohibition on retaining walls constructed within the setback from the natural boundary to the sea.
And my PowerPoint is not responding very well here.
Okay, my mouse is working.
So we have a a the plan uh that includes the house being built as well as the stairway proposed uh concrete stairway, concrete retaining walls, uh, and landscape plan.
Here it's it's it's a little more um legible in the the original plans.
Here is the site plan again uh at the bottom with a more legible uh detail on retaining walls on the site.
There's one here proposed behind the boathouse to control some slumping that's going on in that location, as well as the retaining walls uh that are really required on the site in order to enable uh the new stairway.
And uh the retaining walls have been lowered from the previous application.
They they do not require a a variance to the to the height of uh an allowed retaining wall uh the only prohibition uh if the only variance required is that uh there is a prohibition on retaining walls within that 15 meter setback so in in in summary regarding the environment uh the environmental review by fkw um is is is is really positive as far as uh there is no significant impact uh provided that uh the recommendations in the report are are followed uh the same with the the geotechnical reports uh the the the report indicates that the development is feasible given their list of conditions should this come forward uh to council uh those conditions would be listed out uh verbatim in in the um in in the resolution and really there's three issues for committee to consider the impact of the proposal on the environment which we've just discussed the impact of the variance on the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties and uh and really how to consider the application in the context of the conflict with the boathouse status uh which as we've discussed is is uh for another time regarding the impact on environment uh staff doesn't believe it'll have a significant negative impact uh there is is a landscape plan there um that is within their environmental discussed within the environmental report as far as the use and enjoyment of neighboring properties uh the boat house has obviously been an issue uh with with neighbors we've we've had clear indication that um that boat house is not um not um desired by the neighbors but again not a part of this application uh the remainder of the application, the retaining walls have come down, and uh it is in keeping with a lot of the other uh applications the council has seen uh as far as the character of the foreshore.
And staff has no issue with the current current uh proposal in that regard.
And we've discussed the boathouse.
Again, discussion around the boathouse.
So I'm sorry, I've got the the uh slide for the other application here, but uh staff is supportive of the application um regarding the the variance to the retaining walls and the uh environmental condition and the impact on the the adjacent property.
Thank you great thank you staff are there any questions of staff on this i mean my my personal position is certainly that i'm not going to support any variances um but at any rate are there questions for for staff counselor rogers uh thank you um your worship i'm i'm feeling the same way you are but i do have questions um with respect to what what um the applicant is is requesting and it it seems kind of strange that uh the stairway um is uh you know having an environmental impact by traversing the property it goes from one side cuts across goes down and uh goes right um um abutting uh the the property owner next door you know that that seems like uh I I I don't know maybe it's uh because it's uh less steep but um um it would also seem that they would be uh they could build stairs going straight down to the water from um what would that be the east side um and not be an uh a point of aggravation uh to the neighbors next door so uh Gustaff give me some sense of why it had to traverse the uh the entire property going down uh thank you uh through the chair.
This this uh this site is quite steep.
I I'm not an engineer, I'm not a geotechnical engineer, but if you you do visit the site, uh I don't think that there would be a strong possibility of getting a viable staircase unless it cuts across the slope somewhat.
However, um if if council wishes uh if this requires uh another application or an amendment to this application, that that is something that could be can be looked at with uh with the applicant.
Okay.
I if just another question.
Do you know how what's the width of the stairs?
I believe uh it says uh 12 feet.
12 feet wide?
I'm not sure here.
Um I would I would have to look at the proper plan within the agenda here.
Just a second.
I don't believe it's 12 feet.
I'm just trying to read it there.
No, they look just like a regular web.
So why anyway, that that would be um something that I'd look forward to getting more information on when oh it's hard to read.
Oh, I see.
It's uh basically four to five feet.
I've just enlarged it.
Okay.
Okay.
Yeah, thank you.
That's all that's right.
I'm sharing my trying to share my screen here.
Yeah, no, I've got it.
Thank you.
Okay.
Counselor Kovalovich.
Thank you.
Question for staff.
Is and and any and and CAO can answer this too.
Is this uh I'm I'm more of a process question, but does relate to uh this development permit.
Is this typical for uh something like this to come before council where there's clearly been an application involving a boathouse and now with and I believe the last one included the dock, did it not too?
It was just the boathouse.
Or are this are the stairs or stairs or was it just the boathouse?
James could clarify that, but I'm pretty sure it was.
The the previous application was the boathouse.
Uh it included higher retaining walls.
Uh, but the stairs and retaining walls uh were and and the boathouse were all part of that initial application.
And then um as stated in the cover letter, uh the uh the owner's uh legal counsel uh informed the owner that in his opinion the boathouse was in fact uh lawfully non-conforming and it did not need to be considered.
Okay.
So as for process, this is a brand new application from from the resident, and it's uh just talking about the the retaining walls and asking for uh variances with um with the uh ramp and float.
The ramp and float uh is in the next application.
We have 2020 oh six coming up.
Okay, so okay, as I'll stick to this one then.
This is and this is why I'm asking these questions because it is a little bit confusing.
Um for this particular variance on the retaining wall, retaining and the steps, could it be done successfully by the resident and staff's opinion without requesting a variance?
No, as uh the as uh very excuse me, uh retaining walls are prohibited within that 15 meters.
So in order to build a retaining wall, um it it is a it is necessary to get a variance to that prohibition.
Okay.
And this retaining wall, the purpose of this retaining wall, clearly it it it's multifaceted, and I get that, but on a standalone issue, is the retaining wall critical to any type of uh safety uh to this resident or the the topography?
Uh James?
Uh thank you.
The the retaining wall behind the boathouse, as I'm indicating here, uh there's significant soil, and uh at least the last time I was at the site, and according to the uh the geotechnical report, um there is some slumping here that would greatly um be benefited by having a retaining wall to stop that material falling into the ocean.
Uh it could potentially have an impact on the structures uh in front of it.
But no specific uh safety concerns.
Obviously, this uh area has been like this for for many years, uh and um no there's no structures with with individuals living below it.
Uh no individuals living there, no.
I I I will say that the current um airs on the property the way they had existed for for years.
Uh I I visited the site and I was not comfortable walking on uh a good portion of it.
So it does need some some improvements.
Okay, thank you.
Councillor Lemmon?
Quick question, James.
Are are there any retaining walls along that stretch of Kerwit?
Are there any grandfathered retaining walls?
Have other, you know, historically have any any of the homeowners felt a need to have a retaining wall to to avoid erosion?
Yes, there there are there are um most of the properties along there have have retaining walls that both um existing uh retaining walls predating this council and and predating our bylaws as well as uh retaining walls and uh foreshore structures.
Um I believe it was house re relatively new build, two or three houses uh to the northwest um that that built a very similar foreshore arrangement in the docks.
Yeah, after considerable grief and turmoil with those retaining walls, they actually had to remove them and take a bunch of the height out of them.
Yeah.
So is is there are just because it is a little confusing, um is there a height issue specific to their proposal?
No height issue, no.
Okay.
I think I think the bigger question is why would we grant a variance to work within the 15 meters when they have refused to acknowledge our concerns and our issues with the boathouse and to me that's the only issue um and if they're not prepared to to work with us on that then then i would reject um voting for any variances okay councillor mattson i'll make it quick.
I don't support providing or granting a variance.
Okay, thank you.
So the motion is to receive the report.
Does that give staff some enough to go back and talk to the proponent or yes, thank you.
Okay.
So um is a motion to receive.
Yeah, that's all we need is a motion to receive the report.
Second.
Okay.
So that's moved by councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Kualowich.
All in favor, opposed, that's carried.
Thank you, James.
Um next we have the same address with the ad hoc um application, which again requires variances.
That's correct.
Thank you, your worship.
Presenting an application for a ramp and float attached to the existing platform within the foreshore.
It's entirely within the foreshore, meaning it is it is outside of the applicant's property.
Requires a variance to the setback from the natural boundary for structures from 15 meters to zero meters.
We have an illustration of the proposal here.
The platform wooden platform runs along here, and the proposal would be for the ramp and float that extends, depending on how you interpret our uh how it extends uh 24 meters from the closest portion of the natural boundary, but it is more like 27 or 28 meters uh perpendicular from the the surveyed natural boundary underneath the boathouse.
So it's really the the dock needs to reach deep water, is the consideration here.
We have the private dock development guidelines here.
Should we need to refer back to them?
The big issue here uh the the numbers are that that ramps up to 1.6 meters in width, floats up to 12 meters in length, which is being met by the proposal should not extend more than 25 meters from the natural boundary.
It's it's more or less meeting that there's there's a few meters extra in spots but it is a very irregular shoreline indenting um into the property and these are guidelines they're not they're not bylaws so council can take that into consideration the environmental review uh outlines that this is this is the D DD environmental review um they they have no major concern um the marine environmental assessment indicates that due to the small project footprint, limited duration, working at the least risk timing windows, which would be written into the conditions of the development permit.
So, like the last application, we would write the recommendations from any professional reports, geotechnical and environmental, into the actual conditions of the development permit.
As far as the dock goes, it is uh a very very standard dock, uh consistent with other docks in town, um meets the spirit of our stock development guidelines and staff is supportive of the application.
Thank you.
Thank you, James.
Counselor Lemmon?
Uh James, it looks to me, um oh gosh, there's so much here, um, that in one of the possible renderings, the dock is is skewed, that it's it's splanting to the left.
Would that if were the property next door with the lot next door to be developed.
Would it interact with a dock there?
Should those people want to?
Uh it is it it is possible and encouraged by our OCP and our doc dock doc guidelines to share docks.
However, um the the adjacent lot is currently vacant and um staff believes that this preferred uh scenario from the applicant's point of view uh is also the least impactful uh both from uh as counselor rogers said uh the zigzagging of of paths and and things on the site uh this is certainly the most direct uh path to deep water for for for for the dock for the ramp and the float okay there really wasn't much impact on uh or wasn't much um objective difference it was only a subjective thing it was only an image thing uh as far as the difference in the the ramp placement all right so that the end of the ramp or at the or at the end of the dock wouldn't be in line if if that empty property gets unempty soon to gets filled and they wanted to build the dock it's it's not going to be in line with that property line no the as you can see the the dock um the in in both scenarios the float is in exactly the same position and it doesn't extend over the um property extension in an ideal world the the float would be closer to the center of of those property extensions but the shoreline being what it is uh and and alignment to wave action and things um this probably the best location for it and it would not interfere with the ability of the adjacent property to also have a dock okay thank you next councillor rogers or just just an observation on on our page 11 um 46 in the staff report you can see how at natural fact the Saladana dock is is uh on the the property line rates you know towards uh this property so it it makes sense where they're um locating it from a distance and it's not going to impede on on the other lot just not submission um so your worship I'm wondering uh do we is it it a case of taking the same position as the previous one we just yeah I certainly think it is I'm I'm not prepared to support any any variances at this point.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah.
Um I think it's uh I think it's a fair position to take.
So I would move receipt.
Okay.
Second or for receipt.
Okay.
Councillor moved by Councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Kualovich.
Hello there.
Yeah just that uh one of the other reasons that I have a hard time giving a variance is that uh if our op if our objective is to get two two properties to share a dock or share a to share a dock then this would sort of be counterproductive to allowing this one before the other before there's some sort of agreement between him and our f the future property owner so together.
They're imposing structures.
I mean you know 60 foot dock by twelve foot wide is a seven hundred square foot dock plus the ramp um sticking out into Squarmalt Harbor.
Um two of them so yeah so I mean I I don't disagree with you at all, Counselor Matson.
Regardless of the the variances, I have just concerns about the sheer size of it as well.
Mm-hmm so I mean when this eventually does come back to us in a way that we feel comfortable with I I think it'd be really important for the the owner of this dock, a potential dock, to uh uh uh tell us how he's going to sort of link up with the adjacent property so we don't have two huge structures.
Okay, I'm gonna call the question on receipt.
Right.
Okay, okay, thank you.
All in favor, opposed, that's carried.
Thank you, James.
So we have item D, which is the rezoning for 298 Island Highway.
We'll allow Councillor Lemon a moment to recuse herself.
I will recuse myself.
And uh we all know why.
Okay, thank you, Councilor Lemon.
And I mean, I would, you know, I don't I don't think you should feel the need to stay, but this is for me.
Oh yeah.
It'll be a wet ride home.
Yeah.
Thanks.
Good night, Jerry.
Good night.
So Councillor Lemon has declared a conflict on this and left the meeting for the minutes.
Um okay, James.
Go ahead.
Or whatever staff member is doing this.
Thank you, worship.
This is uh Jeff Chow, Senior Planner.
This is the uh We have a new face.
Yes, good evening.
Uh this is uh official community plan and rezoning application for two nine-eight island highway.
The proposal is to uh redevelop the property for commercial and residential use.
Uh just want to double check that everybody can see the screen.
Yeah.
Great.
And I go try to change the slides here.
And there's the land here.
Um so the proposal is to change the land use designation from neighborhood mixed use, which permits commercial residential use, to uh a new land use designation, which also permits commercial and residential use, but with a higher floor space ratio.
Uh the rezoning application that would be concurrent would be to rezone the property from C1 Community Commercial to a new commercial residential zone that would be in accordance with the uh land use designation.
The development concept, which will be formally considered at the development permit stage, but is to give the idea of the applicant's intent for the property is for a six-story building where the upper two stories would be set back, the ground floor would be commercial use, and the upper floors would be comprised of 54 apartment units, of which there would be 16 one bedroom units, 37 two bedroom units, and one three bedroom unit.
There would be some underbuilding parking and two levels of underground parking.
This is a site plan of the property.
The building that will occupy most of the site.
This shows the ground floor footprint.
There are two accesses proposed, one from Helmkin and one from the island highway.
The island highway access will lead to underbuilding parking on the ground floor.
The Helmkin access will lead to two stories of underground parking.
And the commercial would be at the corner of the property leading along Island Highway.
This is a unique situation in which there's a large boulevard with the island highway and which creates an opportunity for a boulevard and pedestrian plaza.
So the the width of that space from the back of the sidewalk to the property line, the average is probably greater than six meters.
So further away from the intersection, there's a change in grade, but an opportunity for some more than just your usual usual sidewalk.
These are some renderings that show what the building would look like from Island Highway, and the lower set of photos renderings show the illustration of what the pedestrian plaza could look like.
This is a sort of elevation from the island highway frontage that shows the relationship of the proposed building with the Lions Cove site.
This is a six-story building but because it's the change in topography and the way the buildings are set back the roof line would be roughly equivalent to that of Lions Cove.
This rendering doesn't show what the ground floor commercial looks like it just shows a white kind of space there but that would be would be a ground floor commercial use.
The second view shows the view from the Helmkin from Helmkin Road.
Again, it's four stories, kind of a street wall setback uh upper two stories.
The property to the left is a part of three other single-family lots that are that are designated mixed residential and the official community plan are and are currently zoned C1 community commercial just like the subject property.
This is an excerpt from the official community plan that shows how the site is very central to the Helmkin Harbor Community Corridor, which is a uh community, which is a community corridor with commercial and residential uses that divides the uh the Helmkin neighborhood and the harbor, uh the harbor uh harbor neighborhood.
This is a location where uh more intense commercial and residential uses are supported and would lead to the uh future uh town center site at Fort Victoria.
This is the land use designation map from the official committee plan that generally follows uh you know the uh the community corridor concept of neighborhood mixed use at the intersection, which which is a commercial and residential mixes are supported there.
Uh this site uh is bounded uh by an area that is mixed residential, that is some of it is existing apartment use with lines covered to the uh to the uh east of the site uh and showing how this is one leg of a neighborhood center, which in the future we would hope to see more kind of um uh neighborhood commercial uses.
The policies of the Helmkin Harbor uh Helmkin Harbor Community Corridor are in the official community plan.
This uh this proposal um as well as existing designation complies with uh most of those those policies in terms of uh having intensified mixed use uh use uh uses concentrated at the future section, as well as public space improvements, of which the the plaza would be would be a uh a great um neighborhood gathering space.
Uh the applicant's concept for neighborhood grocery deli would be also consistent with the policy in that this commercial uses neighborhood serving and uh and is limited in that at the uh at the intersection.
The proposed plaza, which is uh would support pedestrian safety and connections across the two roads, provides more uh more public gathering space.
The the building and the site development would provide high quality built environment that would become a landmark for this neighborhood center.
Strong and safe community connection safe connections would be provided to the surrounding neighborhood areas as uh the the plaza becomes a focus that uh that links the waterfront, Helmkin Road, the elementary school, and the planned town centers.
And it also has higher residential densities fronting Island Highway.
Uh the proposed neighborhood commercial use would complement and not compete with the future town center.
Consideration should be made as part of this application whether the mixed use intensity would be appropriate for the corridors, lot sizes, and adjacent residential areas.
So, in terms of density units per hectare, for example, uh the site here is uh proposing 291 units per hectare, which sounds like a large number, but the lot size is about 20,000 square feet, and what that translates into is 54 units.
Um, a couple of uh other developments down the road, uh the Maya London uh and the other application that was approved at 242 Island Highway.
Uh those are um those are in the 200 unit per hectare range as well.
And what that translates to here is those projects were 37 units.
This one is 54, which is an increase of 17 units plus the commercial use.
The official local government act does require really an ongoing consultation.
Uh those can be waived, but uh staff recommends that um that the relevant agencies be consulted on this because of the additional density that's requested.
They have impacts on their other agencies' infrastructure.
These applications were referred to the agencies, and no major concerns were noted from a land use perspective, but uh but we would continue that converse uh that consultation as you go through the process and as the bylaw is prepared.
So the recommendation is they for sure be notified of the public hearing as well.
The new zone would be created that that supports commercial ground floor use and a residential apartment use and would accommodate the proposed density, the floor space ratio, and the building height for the for the project.
The community and management contribution policy target is $3,500 per unit, and if 54 units are proposed, that would be $189,000.
Possibly possible ways those funds could be used is towards a housing amnity contribution and improving some of the uh transit shelters in the area, which BC Transit has identified would be desirable given that there is potential increased density in this area.
In terms of transportation impact, uh, the uh the engineering department with the third-party consultant has reviewed the traffic impact and uh notes that because the counts were taken fairly recently, there could be some uh influences from the summer period of the test of the uh traffic counts, the COVID pandemic, which has kind of changed patterns a little bit, and the construction of the Trans Canada uh McKenzie interchange.
Uh more information is requested on bicycle parking, transportation transportation demand management.
The transportation impact assessment most significantly uh recommends reconfiguration of the lanes on Island Highway as they go through the Helmkin Road intersection so that more vehicles can move through the intersection for each uh turn of the signal.
They are requesting more information and how this would align with the town's plan to sort of re realign island highway to straighten out a curve that's that happens beyond the Helmkin intersection.
This illustration here shows the proposal, which is to convert the intersection so that there are two lanes moving through the intersection instead of one as you head from away from downtown, and those two lanes would then merge after the intersection.
In terms of traffic coming um eastbound, uh there would be a dedicated left turn lane and a through lane would be a shared right turn lane.
And one of the questions that arrives from this is how does that impact the the bicycle lane that's um that's currently uh uh eastbound.
Not not to mention you create the exact same sort of raceway that we have on Helmican where people booted on the inside lane to get ahead of the anyhow.
That's that can be discussed down the road, but um I sure don't like that idea.
Whose proposal is this?
Is it from the proponent, is it, Jeff?
That's correct.
So um, so and that is why uh staff is asking for more information right okay yeah Kevin here what what what are the attacks okay sorry Jeff are you you're nearly done uh yeah Kevin Bobies I believe wish to say something oh I I just want to say that uh this uh this plan is um not supported by staff right now uh it needs further detail so um that's kind of where we're at with that okay Kevin go ahead Jeff thank you so um this uh photo here shows a transit stop that is currently um uh sort of probably at a at a point where the additional density wouldn't would mean that shelter should be upgraded because there will be additional uh riders on on the uh on the bus route that heads along that area.
Uh in terms of site servicing, uh the highlight there is that the other issue to look at is that the sewer pump station capacity needs to be confirmed to uh that it can accommodate the additional flow from this development.
Uh public engagement, the applicant canvassed adjacent properties and conducted an open house with res the uh the adjacent neighbors in May.
Comments letters were attached to the report.
In terms of analysis and discussion, and the applicant will will go into that a little bit more in their presentation.
Uh the proposed use uh generally aligned with the official community plans for this area.
They are asking for an increased uh density that is a little bit higher than what we have.
We have currently it's 1.5, and uh in the in uh in more intensive mixed use, we are uh we're promoting 2.5, so this is a higher number, but it is a kind of a site-specific proposal for one lot as opposed to one area.
And we staff recommends future uh further uh uh consultation with the um external agencies.
So the next step is subject to any c comments may come from the committee.
Staff would work with the applicant to provide more information on confirming what the pump station capacity is and and uh the impact the comments that we had on traffic impact assessment.
So the recommendation is to receive the ports and to uh to continue with early and ongoing consultation that concludes the presentation.
Okay.
Thank you Jeff Councillor Matson has a question.
Ron, go ahead.
Thank you.
Yeah I guess my biggest question and potential concern is anything that comes sort of left in left out.
So my the question is is this project viable if there's only write in and write out and does having the traffic circle further up the road allow people to go right out of the building or right out and sort of you know use the traffic circle to get back onto island highway is that sufficient or do they have or do they actually have to have left in left out somewhere through you your worship um the uh the applicant has will provide more information on it they've looked at that a little bit more um this is a location where left in and out is problematic because the volume of traffic and the pro the proximity to the intersection uh and the uh but more information is requested to address that particular question.
Yeah and and just uh if I may um just to elaborate on that, it is very difficult to turn left out of that site uh without major improvements to that area.
So staff is supporting a right-in, right out on both Helmican and Island Highway.
And to further uh Councilor Mattson's uh question is that yeah, if you do turn right out of Helmican, essentially you will have to go down and use that roundabout at Pheasant to navigate.
Does that answer your question, Councillor Mattson?
That's certainly what was my thinking.
Was so uh I'm glad I'm on the same line of staff.
Thanks.
Okay, thank you.
So, questions from Council for Staff.
We do have the applicant, I think, also on the phone for a presentation.
Okay.
I'll wait until I ask the applicant.
Okay, so thank you, staff.
So is the applicant there?
Hoping for a fairly brief presentation given the hour.
Yeah.
Uh through you, your worship.
Uh I believe the applicant is uh is dialed in and we just they'll need to unmute their phone, I suppose, and I'm going to load up their presentation.
Okay, thank you.
So, applicant, if you're there, you need to press star six to unmute yourselves.
Can you hear us?
We can hear you, yeah.
Thank you very much, your worship and counsel.
Welcome.
Fabulous.
Um, I will say that um to preface, this is the first time that um either both the staff report um as well as verbally that I've heard that staff are not supporting us right now.
Um, and I'm actually quite uncomfortable even giving a presentation without their support.
I I don't I if I can just interject, I don't think that's what staff said.
Staff said they weren't in support of your suggested configuration of the intersection.
My apologies.
I I'm presuming that you know details like that get worked out as we we move along.
Understood.
And I can explain that as we get deeper into the presentation.
I will be brief.
Cow has my um first slide up.
Um Mr.
Um that is a picture of my office, and my clients and I are actually sitting in there right now.
Um what our our tagline is right there is continuing to create architecture that enhances life, the environment.
Um that's our mission statement.
We take it very seriously.
Next slide, please, Mr.
Chow.
There may be a there may be a bit of a lag.
So um we wish to humbly thank you um for considering this tonight.
Um it's a very highly visible corner, as you know.
Um we think it it creates a tremendous opportunity for us to um to provide a landmark, um, an entryway, a gateway building that we think will, if done correctly, set a great precedent for future development along the corridor.
My clients, the Sangera family, who are with me tonight.
As you know, I've already made a fairly significant investment in your town with the Glentana, which is now under construction.
It is going extremely well.
Sales are great, so they want to continue.
They're proud of that project.
They want to do another project and continue to continue to invest and to assist the town in realizing their visions and aspirations, not just for this site, but for future opportunities.
But it doesn't really have a village yet.
So we're kind of, you know, that offers shops and services, mixed use buildings, that people don't have to get into their cars just to go and and buy a coffee.
So we're hoping that this is kind of the first um project that will um start to set the the tone and start to create that village.
Um, you know, with with the onset of COVID, um, I actually just gave a webinar a couple of weeks ago um about uh how we believe um as a firm um and as a um as a profession, if you will, that there is kind of a a resurgent resurgence um to the desire to to to to walk to these villages um as opposed to sort of the big box retailers.
And you know, we we've done a lot of canvassing in the neighborhood, and I'll get into more detail with that in a minute, but um there's a lot of excitement of people sort of having a little neighborhood center, a place that they can go to, a place that they can sit and have coffee and meet their neighbors, and there really isn't that right now um without getting in out of your car.
Um and so um the the I think Mr.
Chow did a good job of um next slide, please, Mr.
Chow, of um kind of going through the OCP.
Um, but you know, this this resurgence of a village like uh community um is really written already, already all through the OCP.
This isn't sort of a change.
And it's interesting how so much of society now that we've kind of understood okay, let's get in our cars, let's go to cost, you know, let's go to big box, let's let's um um do um massive um changes.
Um we're almost going backwards in history, and and and it's really um about people simplifying their lifestyles and getting out of their automobiles, and that's really what this project is all about.
Next slide, please.
Um and of course, um, you know, right out of the OCP, and I'm not going to go through every one of these in the interest of time, um, but I do like this um uh this quote out of your OCP that this was represents a significant paradigm shift for a community characterized by detached ground-oriented housing and a community and a commuting workforce.
And that is really what this project, in summary, is trying to do.
Um, we believe that we have created.
On the top right there, you see sort of more of a context plan.
This is why I'm calling it a gateway intersection.
It really is along the Hankin Island corridor.
We have three bus stops right at our doorstep, so it's absolutely appropriate for public transportation.
To the north of the site, as Mr.
Chow pointed out, there are three homes there, but they are designated as future apartment apartments or town homes.
One of the sites is already being purchased and is considered for redevelopment.
On the east side, we have an existing um really five-story building, but it reads from the highway as six stories.
That's why Mr.
Chop pointed out that our massing is relatively appropriate.
It won't sort of stick out like a sore thumb.
And I don't think that I have to go through all the site statistics because Mr.
Chow did a great job of that.
What I do want to point out though is that you know this was a former service station site.
It was contaminated when we purchased it.
Um, it's it's since been remediating, since been remediated.
We're awaiting final testing results, and we do have difficult uh geotechnical conditions, um, some bedrock and so on.
There's also a right-of-way uh that borders the north part of the site, which kind of constrains the site quite a bit, which re tightens up the parking.
So, I guess my point here is that with these constraints, it is not a cheap build.
Next slide, please, Mr.
Chow.
Um I'm not going to explain the top right diagram because Mr.
Chow did an excellent job of that.
Um, but you can see that um the building uh lion's cove development next door to us is on much higher ground, and even though it's a four-story building, it's got a steeply pitched roof.
Um reading is five stories plus, you know, the grade change.
So, as you can see, our roof lines uh align very, very nicely.
But you know what's important is these sort of white cubes that we've developed around the bit, these white floating cube cubes, and reading the the the intent there is to um um have the building actually read very, very subordinate uh to the lion's cove development.
So from the streetscape or anywhere around the perimeter of the site, you're actually gonna read this as a three-story floating cube above the retail.
Um it will not ever read as a six-story building other than the corner element, which we purposely did as again as a gateway feature.
In fact, we even thought about maybe um council might want to entertain um a little sign-up there that says welcome to View Royal.
Um where am I going here?
Okay, so I think Mr.
Chow did a great job as well as mentioning the terracing.
As you can see in the top right corner, even the sixth floor is set back quite significantly.
And that really was to allow natural light and privacy.
We have taken the residential entry, we place it um on the other side along Helmkin, not just so we can have continuous um streetscape um uh commercial on the ground floor, but it's also sort of the more benign road, it's got the bus stop there, and uh it made more sense to place the residential entry um around the around the corner.
Johnson.
Next slide, please, Mr.
Um, I think he already explained the ground floor very, very well.
We have the 54 um residential units, but there's a wide variety um um you know of of unit typologies um that will attract renters um or investment-related purchasers.
We actually have a few up in Guantana.
There's gonna be first-time buyers, um, young or established families, empty nets or seniors in the stable and disabled.
And we find that that um that when we introduce this kind of a variety of unit typologies, um, it just makes the community within the community that much more interesting.
Um we've and and I think that um Jeff did a great job as well of explaining the landscape Civic Plaza.
It's got all kinds of little individual gathering areas, both along Island Highway as well as Humpkin Street.
And as you can see, we've also sort of opened up that whole corner there and set the retail facade quite a ways back from the property line, again, in order to give as much breathing space to the general public as a as an offering as possible.
And in that public plaza, of course, benches, bike parking, street trees, street lighting, um, and an excellent signage package that you'll see in our renderings.
Next slide, please.
Um, I'm again, I'm not really sure it's important to go over the stats in terms of the parking stalls, but you know, one thing to note is that we have intentionally um, unlike you know, some of the projects along the highway right now where parking is in front of the building, which is sort of a very suburban response.
We've taken a more urban response and put um approximately 19 or 20 stalls behind the building so they're not seen from the high from any of the streets.
Um, and really that's just for convenient parking for the for the um for the gourmet grocery store.
There's a couple more or a few additional stalls underground for the commercial.
We see those as mostly being used for the employees, so that the surface stalls can remain for customers, and then um the rest of the uh underground parking stalls are for the residents, um, all located again underground.
Um those stalls, by the way, the commercial parking stalls, and there's 20 of them.
You know, when the grocery store closes at night, we think that those could become ideal visitor parking, of course, for the residential guests.
We are going to be roughing in electric vehicle charging stations for every underground vehicle and also be providing electrical vehicle charging stations for any buyers that want it right off the bat.
Is because we have quite an amenity package.
It's interesting.
We've got a strata medium room on the ground floor.
Of course, the neighborhood grocery store we consider being an amenity, and I'll get into that in the next slide.
We have a big roof garden, a common roof garden up to the sixth floor, and we're programming that rather for urban agriculture.
We find that a lot of people that are moving that are downsizing from their single family homes miss their gardens.
So to give them an opportunity to grow their veggies and their tomatoes and so on within their development is an incredibly great offering.
Outdoor seating, outdoor fireplace, outdoor kitchen, all that kind of stuff that really is intended to promote both sustainability as well as what I keep coming back to a community within a community.
And the shared workspace, which I'll get into more detail now, Mr.
Chow.
Next slide, please.
So this whole shared workspace, this concept is derives from the fact that we have over 50% of, and this is pre-COVID, over 50% of our workforce in our country working out of their homes.
The CNHC study revealed that though productivity has gone up, and a lot has to do with the fact that people don't have to sort of drive to work, depression has also gone up.
And the reason is when you're working out of your apartment, there's absolutely no spirit of community or collaboration amongst anybody, your sort of work other than who you live with.
You don't even have to get out of your pajamas if you don't want to.
There's no need to make you know yourself presentable.
And there's no change in the environment.
So depression's gone up along with productivity.
So as a firm, what we've been doing is we've been promoting shared workspaces in virtually all of our condominium projects that we can talk our clients into.
And the benefits are that you collaborate with your neighbors.
You sit down and you share ideas and you put up a power a presentation and you know the guy who knows grammar better than the next guy can make comments and and bounce ideas off each other.
Of course there's no reliance on the automobile because you don't have to drive to work.
When you bring clients into your building to give them a little presentation.
It's a lot better than um taking them into a professional space than walking them down a corridor into your individual strata unit.
And again promoting community within the community within the the building.
And the the most important thing really here is that it promote it promotes affordability because those that would need a two bedroom or would need a one bedroom and den or an extra bedroom to purchase because they need that for their home office no longer have to.
They can just go down to the conference room or down to the shared workspace and use that.
So we typically outfit these spaces with a little you know a small conference room a washroom a kitchenette and cubicles and then all the technical features that would allow us to do what we're doing right in front of you tonight.
Next slide, please, Mr.
Chow.
Okay, so the commercial offering.
Um and this is really all about selecting the appropriate tenant.
You know, we didn't want to put in any use that wasn't complementary to both the neighborhood as well as our project.
And so we did a lot of soul searching, a lot of community consultation, guys, what's missing?
And really what it came back with was we would just love uh a doormake or grocery store, sort of a red barn or who the other guys were talking to Nature's Mother's Nature's Village.
We actually have quite a few people that are um interested in taking the space which is which is super exciting for us.
And the reason being is because it just promotes such an amazingly um active streetscape once we do that.
You know, I'm comparing that to say um a Tim Hortons, or I'm comparing it to a McDonald's, or I'm comparing it to a um a convenience store.
And so the way that we've designed, even though the site actually has a about a 16 foot crossfall from one end to the other, we have intentionally designed this as a 6,000 square foot contiguous one-level space so that a grocery store can go in there.
And as you can see from the rendering on the bottom right, it just creates this amazing hub that will become, I hope, you know, the place to go with outdoor seating, overhead garage doors, um, sandwich boards on the on the sidewalk, fresh fruits and vegetables, delies, um coffee, you live and get your pay, etc.
etc.
So I'll kind of stop there.
Um, and of course, because of the way that we've designed the parking, we've separated the commercial surface parking access and egress um from the underground.
Um, it'll be very convenient to use despite the write-in, write-out restriction.
Um I think I'll leave it there.
And next slide, please, Mr.
Chow.
This slide here kind of gives you a good blow-up of an indication of what we have in mind for the um uh for the street level.
Pretty exciting stuff.
Okay, public consultation efforts.
Um, you know, we we obviously wanted to uh host a public open house and then COVID struck the world, and so we reached out a couple of times to Lions Cove Development.
I think that I actually wrote to the mayor and council and explained to them the sort of um our efforts.
Uh we were finally invited into the Lions Co.
community to present our concepts.
Um the the concepts that we um showed them were identical to our current application.
There was actually not one concern raised in that meeting.
There was approximately 20 people that attended.
And at the end of that meeting, we actually sent um received a standing ovation.
That has actually never happened in my full year career.
Pretty exciting stuff.
So we knew that we were kind of on the right track.
We had one email following that meeting that was negative.
We then went on and our development team took our our design package door to door.
And similar to Lions Code meeting, we had 21 people love it, and again, only one person that was not in support.
So I don't think that we're sort of um running into anything contentious here.
Quite the contrary, I think that we have a community that's very, very excited about our project.
Of course, what always comes up and what's already come up before I even gave his presentation is the good old um word called traffic.
Next slide, please, Mr.
Cowan.
So um just to be clear, um the the the the the highway um uh reconfiguration, as you can see, was only a sketch that our traffic engineer came up with.
And it wasn't as a result of our development, it was a result of forecasting traffic increase in um between now and 2033.
Okay, so 13 years from now.
So this isn't necessarily um required as part of our development.
It's really a matter of line uh of line painting, re repainting the lines on the highway.
It was merely a suggestion.
Personally, I don't believe that there is going to be a whole lot of traffic increase between now and 2033, and that's because of the new um uh access, the the new overpass, uh the old uh interchange.
So you know, people are going to be going up um Helmkin, they're gonna be getting on the interchange and getting back and forth to Victoria or wherever they want to go um much easier than using um old island.
So if anything, we sort of see um traffic diminishing on on on on island sorry not old island highway um uh what else do I want to say about that and of course you know it it's frustrating for me because we have a surplus of bicycle parking um we have 70 some on stalls uh proposed and we believe they're gonna be extremely well used given the trail connections and sort of the the healthy lifestyle that we're promoting within this building.
And you know in addition uh you know the the the methodology that these um traffic consultants use doesn't even um uh account for the fact that we have bus stops in every direction and that people we're trying to get people out of their cars.
In fact, if council would entertain we we'd actually like to do less parking.
We're sort of uh just at about or just barely exceed the parking bylaw, and uh, you know, we're we'd be happy to put in a communal stall or two to reduce um traffic.
But um, as far as science goes, as far as traffic associated with science associated with this development, um, there's absolutely no concerns that came out of the traffic impact assessment.
Now, privately, we also heard uh one comment um about um uh traffic circulation.
So, yes, you know, when we get um out of our site from our underground parkade, um, it's only safe to turn right along Hamilton.
So, what happens if you actually do want to circle back in the highway?
On the slide on the left hand side is one option.
I think that that is what that one person was fearful of is that you um come out of the site, you turn right, you go up Hamilton, uh, you um turn right under Rudgy uh Rudyard, you turn right again in the storm month, and then go down to the highway.
I'm gonna argue that that's never gonna happen.
I'm gonna argue that it's far more um efficient for one to turn right, and this is the right-hand slide, the option two to turn right, go up to the turnabout, come back and um and and and hit the intersection to either take a left or the right um onto island highway.
And we actually measured the uh the the the the time involved.
We actually have a video of it um to do option one versus option two.
We also um uh time the light, the lights, the actual um the the red lights, and how long you have to sit at the intersection and and they're considerably different so um at the end of the day um option one on the left hand um diagram it would take two and a half minutes to um exit the site and get up in the intersection and again driving very successfully through a neighborhood if I may just interest of time I mean what we're really looking at tonight is is land use and the zoning and whether council's interested in in advancing that clearly, in terms of traffic movements, you have some work to do with staff.
Should this move forward and and I think personally it'd be better to let you do that.
And then if there's agreement that this is going to move forward, that can all come back at the same time.
Thank you.
Understood, your worship.
Would you like me to conclude my presentation?
Yep, no, do finish your presentation.
I'm just I'm just aware of the time, and we've we've been here since 3:30.
Yeah.
Understood.
It's just the question, the question came up, so I just wanted to answer.
Sure.
Um, and a typical floor plan, again, good unit mix.
Um, the renderings that Mr.
Chow has already shown.
That is it, your worship.
Thank you for your patience.
Okay, thank you very much.
Questions for the proponent from anybody?
Councillor Rogers.
Uh a question to uh to staff.
Okay.
Yeah.
So um uh staff, the um you know, there's an idea that we could have a Gormway grocery store or the Red Barn, um, which I think is very exciting.
But if um you know, and we had a wonderful grocery store that was um uh that went into the um um slake village uh on Slix Mile and it eventually um had to fold, lack of business.
Um what would prevent um another um use such as uh 7 Eleven or Max convenience store to uh go in into this place instead?
Um through you, your worship.
Uh it depends on how the zone is crafted.
Um there are uh typically commercial uses you can sort of um fine-tune some of the commercial uses in within the zoning uh bylaw we have definitions of different types of uses and in considering the bylaw that bylaw could focus be more focused in the what types of commercial uses go in this location okay yeah so that that would be um really important to uh to take care of those those aspects I think in the past we've we put restrictions simply on opening hours right to to keep away from any how I mean that could be discussed down the road, but just simply to avoid any potential 24 hour operation.
Yeah.
Sorry yeah no, okay the you know it's look as long as we have those safeguards.
But part of part of the land use and part of a successful um business is uh traffic.
And and um, you know, one of the discussion points we had the this afternoon uh was um with respect to the V Row Square and uh the challenges of traffic uh that they have.
And um, you know, we I think you may have addressed the the concerns of um the amount of parking that might be for staff um parking.
But um, you know, the the difficulty is that if um if you know a shopper who wants to go to the grocery store can't see the parking, you know, personally if I wanted to go in there, I'd be going across Helmican and I'd try to do it right in.
Probably where the uh the condo um apart uh parking is.
And if I wanted to go into the rear where you're suggesting that there would be the um commercial parking, um I would have no idea.
I guess what I'd have to do is go around um to Rudyard and upstoremont and then down and around and eventually find my way into it.
Or I could just go to um I don't know another grocery store.
Or you could walk because you live pretty close by.
I I I'm thinking of the folks are you know I may be walking, but then I might be driving um because I want to go to Camos and college and I need to pick up something on the way.
Um so it's uh it's a real interesting challenge you've got with um the parking um uh as as you're suggesting.
So um you may want to think about the uh driver mentality is they want to get to your wonderful grocery store in the Red Barn really is very popular, but it's transient parking in out Dubai.
Uh your worship, may I address that comment?
Sure, go ahead.
And and to be brief, Sir Lass.
I'll be brief.
I'll be brief.
Um, you know, once you get a destination, what we call a destination-oriented retailer like that, um people will uh learn their ways.
Um, secondly, uh and understand how to easily get it in note.
Secondly, if for example, one is heading north on Helmkin and want to get into the grocery store, again, we have nine commercially uh designated underground stalls um off of Helmkin from the underground parkade.
So it can actually be accessed from um virtually all directions.
So speaking to the land use itself, uh question for staff.
First, uh this is um under the or adheres to the proposal is to increase the uh the existing the density is supported in the existing land use designation by how much?
Um by one 1.5 uh floor space ratio.
So the current land use designation supports 1.5.
The proposal is for three, and that's because we have both residential and commercial use.
Right, right.
And how many proposed businesses are to be on the ground floor?
Or has that been not talked about yet?
Uh through you, your worship, uh the proposal is for uh six roughly six thousand square feet of commercial floor space.
The development concept is for one tenant.
Okay, okay.
And question for staff.
Uh just wanted to get your opinion on, and then again, I'm I'm not an expert on this, but it it just seems like um the the footprint of this building is takes up a lot of the space.
And I'm just wondering this is obviously a an intersection that we uh we want to look to the future for development.
We've discussed it as a council as a an area for improvement.
It's a high traffic area.
There's room for future development on the lot Kitty Corner one day.
And I'm just wondering if is there any encroachments to the island highway that this project requests to do with like turning lanes and things like that.
Or I'm just I'm just thinking long term if we can leave more road space available for this intersection and if it's going to need improved bike lanes one day and things like that if if the area actually does in fact build up and something we decide to uh approve something kitty corner where the vacant lot is next to the uh I guess for lack of better words the ground level suites yeah three your sorry or Jeff yeah go ahead this is uh Kevin's department thanks, Jeff.
Yeah, so uh staff uh have a uh a conceptual design uh for island highway.
Um as you well are aware that we've done some beautification up you know by V Royal Avenue on Island Highway.
So there is a plan um that we have uh from Beaumont to Helmakin Road.
Uh so there is a preliminary plan in place.
And how does this building fit into that plan?
Uh it hasn't been coordinated yet with the consultant.
That would be one of our uh details that we have to discuss with them.
Yeah.
Okay.
Uh obviously I've got concerns with with the intersection.
I'm just I'm wanting to do some visioning as a council and make sure that uh this intersection in this area is developed uh thoughtfully.
I uh that being said, I think I think it's a unique building.
I like some of the ideas they have.
Uh I may be a bit dense for me but um there's a lot of good things happening.
Thank you.
Counselor Matson go ahead yes thank you.
So I was wondering if the developer would be willing to incorporate into the um zoning bylaw basically uh a use for that ground level which would basically limit it to um the type of entity he's talking about basically you know the uh sort of higher end grocery store through your worship yeah go ahead please um I just had that discussion with my client um as i said we have three grocery stores that are chains that are um interested in taking our site we have no interest whatsoever either from a marketability nor from a septiced standpoint um to uh to introduce the uses the the unwanted uses um that we had proposed before um the the advantage of a gourmet grocery store is not just a grocery store but you get a deli you get a coffee shop you get outdoor seating you get all these amenities that enliven the streetscape and actually become an amenity for our residents as well so um we are we are very comfortable limiting that ground floor to grocery store use only that would preclude the other unwanted commercial activities so these thank you that's certainly what I was was hoping for so that would certainly meet my needs thank you okay so I I mean I'm seeing general nods of the head that that we're all right with this moving forward in the process to by lost age and answering some of the the more difficult questions about traffic flow and intersection and that type of thing is my everyone's okay with that councillor Madsen.
Yeah, I'm I'm item craft.
Thank you.
Yeah, no, I think it um it could be an exciting project for that corner.
So thank you.
Thank you for the presentation.
Um can I get a motion to receive and to extend the meeting by 10 minutes, please?
Second.
That's moved by Councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Kualowicz.
All in favor, opposed, that's carried.
Public, if there's anyone wanting to call in for question period, please please get on the telephone now because we're going to be there very, very soon.
Um in a matter of seconds.
Councillor Roger.
Yep.
Uh you could staff asked uh Council to consider a motion for notification to the various authorities with respect to uh committee I know how to do that.
Well, they do that as a matter of course.
Are they asking for a specific motion?
I mean that I think so.
And that notification that uh hydro on the BC.
Well, they that they do that with all zonings.
Um, go ahead, Lindsay.
I didn't even know you were with us.
I've I've been here the whole time.
Um with with respect to the OCP amendment, staff will craft a suitable motion for council to consider at uh next week's meeting.
Okay, okay, thank you.
And and just I don't know if Dawn is still well, I think Don must still be with us.
I I think at these meetings, we should do a roll call at the beginning so that we know who we have here for questions, because I didn't realize Lindsay was on the line.
Um I'm not complaining, but I just think it'd be helpful for us to know what resources we have.
So okay, so I'm gonna call the question on that, or did I already?
All in favor, posed, that's carried.
So we have no public works and transportation.
Um so we have correspondent switches A through uh V, yeah.
Uh motion to receive.
Okay.
Everyone's good.
No comments.
Question?
Okay, all in favor, opposed, that's carried.
So now we do have question period um public.
So if you would like to call in with a question, um now is your opportunity.
It is on your screen.
It's 778-402-9227.
And the meeting ID number is 150-012-433 pound.
Staff, are there any um callers on the line?
Your worship, uh, there are currently no callers on the line.
Perhaps we could give more time for callers to call call in if there are any up this late.
I do know I am aware that Julie has some chats that have come in that she would like to share with you.
Okay, well, yeah, we can do the chats, and then hopefully in that time, if anyone's gonna call in, they will be there.
Yes, Mr.
Mayor, we have some questions for council.
A Privo from 52 Stone Ridge Drive has a comment and some questions.
Thank you for the opportunity to present our concerns regarding the development of number 9 Erskine Lane.
I have read the developer plans in full, and I have to disagree with the current owner of the property.
The scope of the development is not congruent with the density of the current neighborhood.
Stone Ridge and Erskine is primarily single family homes.
Dedicated rental house is needed, but it would not support existing quality of life.
Current neighborhood is surrounded by ALR and undeveloped land.
Tree protection is a concern.
One of the issues that residents have with this project is the height of the buildings.
Current residents would lose privacy.
Five stories overlooking family private property is not acceptable.
As a parent, I have concerns about the safety of my children.
Number seven, Erskine is not overlooking private property.
So the density is not relevant for this issue.
As an aside, public engagement from the developer has been lacking and is not sufficient.
How many trees are they cutting down?
And will the urban forest be accessible to the public.
Okay, thank you.
I I presume that must have come in much earlier, did it, under public participation rather than question period?
Uh it was after, but yeah.
Yeah.
But was meant to be public participation, obviously.
Yeah, she has two other questions as well.
Uh will the road upgrades happen before constructions?
And will the developer give more than same-day notice for the next open house?
Well, in terms of the open houses, I I mean I think it's important to remember that open houses are very difficult in COVID times.
And we we do know that the proponent um knocked on many doors through the neighborhood and and has had open houses as well.
We will certainly ask them to provide good notice.
I think you're uh thinking shy walk.
Yeah.
Are there any other people on the on the chat function, Julie?
Yeah, I have I have a bunch more questions.
Uh M.
Hankewich from number 76, 14 Erskine Lane.
Uh he was not invited to the open houses and did not speak to anyone from the developer in their door knocking campaign.
He does not agree with the developer's characterization of sufficient engagement.
I guess that was more of a comment.
We are appreciating the changes the developer is making, but no one is talking about building a sidewalk prior to the development.
That is of utmost concern of our residents.
Everyone walks down the road now because there is no sidewalk.
Can you please address getting a sidewalk prior to development?
Also, the hospital way trail is the reason why that cannot be paved with lighting to those using the hospital, especially jerk during evening hours instead of gravel, which is difficult to walk on.
Thank you.
Okay, thank you.
L.
Mueller, number 44, 14 Erskine Lane.
Dear Mayor and Council, your staff member utilized all the technical terms and jargon to make this sound vastly improved.
Bottom line I suggest there is little in way of change to density and should resonate with you as you were unanimous at last meeting for saying too much density for too little space.
This street is a bottleneck, and with the project at seven Erskine Lane, it will be too much.
As Councillor Mattson eloquently stated, what is the significant differences from this?
And the last proposal.
I suggest simply window dressing in terms of a few added trees, a sidewalk, and a confirmed roundabout commitment.
But density and impact, do you honestly believe it is not the same?
Thank you.
Just an anonymous question saying there is also access to the galloping goose on Talcott.
Are neighbors aware of this?
Okay, not sure why that needs to be anonymous, but thank you.
R.
Rose from 293 Eltham Road regarding the 298 Island Highway presentation.
Says egress to this property is going to be left turn only at a very busy intersection.
So I I yeah.
So this is quest.
Thank you, Julie.
But I mean that one I know came in much later in the meeting.
And this is question periods, and what we're getting is statements.
Yeah, she does have some questions as well.
Um will there be more police presence at the intersection to deter left turns out of the property?
Where is the parking for the commercial space?
I hope they aren't intending to use our very short Eltham Road for overflow parking.
Well, in terms of the police, I would probably venture a guess that the RCMP are not going to sit there spending time to capture someone making an illegal turn because I don't think it'd be worth their while.
But if it was to be a problem, I'm sure we could ask them.
And you know, I mean, I I fully understand people don't want parking on Eltham Road.
Um, but Eltham Road is a public road, is the reality.
So, you know, unless we change it to at any rate, those are way down the the line, those those types of questions okay.
Thank you, Mr.
Mayor.
That is the end of the questions.
Thank you, Julie.
Can can Judy um type these up for us on their notes that she gets, but I'd like to have them in the why don't you watch it on the web?
I think that's well, seriously, I think you know that it'll be on the webcast, right?
But it'd be nice to I think for staff to have to, I mean, Kim could check on that, but for staff to have to produce a report is is a bit onerous.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah.
Well, yeah, that wouldn't be that quick a type.
That was quite a bit of um statements, but it certainly is on the webcast.
Okay, I'll look at that.
Um and so are there any callers, Don?
Your worship, there are not at this time.
Okay, thank you.
So let's have a motion to terminate.
Okay.
Thank you, everyone.
Thank you, staff.
Good night.