Committee of the Whole

Good afternoon, everyone.

And we'll call the committee of the whole through July 12th to order.

And we'll begin by recognizing the Lakungan speaking people known today as the Squimalt Nation and Songhees Nation and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.

This afternoon and this evening, we will hear from the public during the public participation portion of the agenda and the question period later.

So if you wish to speak to any item on the agenda this afternoon, public participation is going to come up almost immediately.

So you'd like probably want to get on the phone now.

So it's 778 402 9227.

And when prompted, enter conference ID 510 587 99 pound.

At the appropriate time in the agenda, I will announce the last four digits of your phone number, ask you to mute the live webcast to avoid feedback, ask you to not use speakerphone to ensure sound quality, and ask that you unmute yourself by pressing start six.

And if you could begin by giving us your name and address for the record, and then you can give us the benefit of your views.

This meeting will be recorded by participating in this webcast.

You are consenting to being recorded, and the recording will be available on the town's website for future access.

And then for this evening's agenda items, there's a separate public participation when we come back to order at seven o'clock.

And so with that, if I can get a motion to approve the agenda.

Second.

Thank you.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

And then a motion to adopt the June 14th minutes.

Comment corrections.

Thank you.

Moved and seconded by councillors Matson and Rogers.

No.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

I should mention that Councillor Lemmon sends her regrets because she's ill, and our CAO also sends his regrets.

So next up, we do have public participation period.

Do we have any callers on the line, Staff?

Your worship, we have no callers at this time.

Okay.

So then we'll move right to protective services, and I may as well just retain the chair.

So then we'll go straight to the transforming policing and community safety in British Columbia report dated April 2022.

So we touched on it briefly when I still call him Inspector Preston all the time rather than superintendent Preston was here at the last committee of the whole, and whether we wanted to write a letter of support for the RCMP, whether we, you know, or how so I just suggested that the whole document be put on an agenda.

So what council wants to do with it, I suppose, is um I'm happy just to write a letter of support for the RCMP.

Yeah.

I don't want to do much with this.

Well, we can certainly do.

I mean, I would like to write a letter of support about the lack of involvement and consultation with local government.

Um, and I would also like to write, I could write quite a likely letter about this, actually having read it more thoroughly.

Um the whole perspective of the report, and I don't know, I know we don't want to get into it in a major way, and I suspect we have two police officers in the room that have, but the whole when you read the forward to the report, the whole perspective of you know, nowhere in there in the forward, does it say anything about maintaining law and order in our community being a priority?

Right?

It's entirely from a perspective of decolonization, um, systemic racism, and all which are very worthy issues, but nowhere does it talk about the need to maintain law and order in our community and what's the best way to do that.

And I I just personally found that really worrying.

I mean, one of the problems we have with many reports is if you get a an advocate group who writes it, I mean, it's it's so slanted, you know.

I don't want to go into detail about some of our reports, but you need someone who's unbiased to look at both sides and provide opinions, right?

Not to start off by telling basically telling you where they're gonna go with this.

I mean, yeah.

Well, and again, when you look at the list of participants, and I don't know them well enough, but but that none of it um none of them jumped out to me as being policing experts or people working in policing so I don't know that that perspective was provided at all.

Did do you know the answer to that question just out of curiosity whether or not there was anyone from policing actually on the committee.

Right and they offered perspective about um desired changes and how we could be piecing forward.

I'm not sure though what or how much of that information was incorporated into the final.

Right, into the report.

Yeah.

So what I would like to do with council's blessing, and and I know it did, but is just to write a letter expressing our concern about the complete lack, and it really is a complete lack, of engagement with local government.

Um our strong support for our sub-regional policing model with the RCMP, which has been very successful for us, and our and our expressed desire that no changes take place or be mandated um without that set engagement.

If that makes sense to everybody.

Go ahead, John.

Yeah, no, I I agree.

It certainly is a uh um an interesting report that has brought out a a lot of very significant issues and um long-standing issues uh that indeed um I I appreciate we we need to address.

Um however, uh my biggest uh concern with this is that um through all the recommendations there was no cost analysis.

This is an expensive document for for all the ramifications of what um uh they would um you know to implement these list of recommendations is is is enormously expensive.

Um and um I think if we're going to uh anybody um and I think this is where some um akin to um what you know you're saying your worship is um uh i think if municipalities were involved they they would you know bring that to the foreground what is this going to cost uh uh in order to achieve um all these uh changes and and um from uh from a a policing safety perspective um uh I see the value I understand the necessity of um um you know police going and doing wellness checks and and uh ensuring that there's the safety because it's a very uh uh delicate situation.

Um but and i i so I can see both both perspectives but um the the biggest problem I have is uh what was that funding, page 61.

There's no recommendations all the other sections had recommendations there wasn't a recommendation on that one that um i think uh spoke volumes to me that uh they realized that this this whole thing was going to be amazingly costly um in terms of uh representation we hear from the several times from Victoria, Esquimalt, CRD once um and the good news is the West Shore got mentioned on on its representation and and um uh work with uh the First Nations um but I think if we're talking about regional policing, uh the West Shore has achieved that with all with the municipalities that we've got yeah, absolutely.

No, we have a sub-regional police force.

Yeah.

That's right.

Yeah.

So um I I think if we were I and I I I know this is back in and uh somehow I thought there was an opportunity to give feedback uh to this uh in a survey, but that was that was gone and done in 2021 during the pandemic.

Um so yeah I'm um I without the costing, I don't see much credibility in the report.

Damien, do you want to add anything in or no?

No, I don't I don't disagree.

I think uh there's certainly uh politicalization of certain studies happening uh without focusing too hard on this one.

Uh sometimes uh the objectives of uh government agencies are are simply uh not even included.

And I don't disagree with you.

Uh fact of the matter is police are expected to maintain law and order.

Uh we do have uh some issues in British Columbia right now with law and order, we have a court system that is extremely backlogged, and we have offenders uh repeating their offenses over and over again, and it needs to be addressed.

It is a it is an issue with uh our constituents, and I know it's an issue with British Columbians, so I fully agree with you.

The absence of that um is certainly noteworthy.

If you wish I can just pick up on uh point, um, you know, this is all about um transforming police, but the community safety aspect, um, uh if we're not going to be talking about the courts and the backlog and and uh dealing with those issues, maybe even from a corrections perspective, um, then we're only doing we're only looking at one part.

Well that that was kind of my point right at the beginning, is that I mean, even if they can provide costing, I think the whole thing's been it's been looked at through one lens and one lens only.

And I mean, part of me thinks that in some ways we're better just to because I we haven't heard any uptake on it as far as I know.

So the province may just file it and it may just quietly go away.

But part of me also thinks that we should just express our our concerns in case you know they do.

I mean, if we they can't even set up an independent uh police force in Surrey, I'm not quite sure how they're gonna do it for the entire province.

But anyhow.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

So move move by Council Roger, second by Councillor Mattson.

I I think we should write the letter.

Okay.

I'll I'll pen a letter and I'll send it out to you so that you can see it.

Just expressing our support of the RCMP and our concern about the process and um etc.

Okay.

Did did uh we went to Yeah, I don't know.

Did you want to add anything or would you rather just I don't think it's appropriate for me to leave into that question?

Yeah, that's a political matter.

Yeah, fair enough.

Yeah.

Okay.

Call a question.

All in favor.

That's carried.

And then I guess actually that's um all we need you for.

So thank you.

We got lots of time to get to you.

Thanks for coming.

Other than protection for the hordes that are coming in.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, uh thanks for coming.

So and we don't have anyone for the public safety report by the looks of it.

So no.

If you have questions, I can ask those.

Yeah, I think I have one wrote down here.

By the way, congratulations to uh Captain Mullen for his graduation.

Right.

Very fancy picture.

Oh, yeah, and we got our $25,000.

The uh the one question did have maybe for just they've got two public education workshops scheduled but canceled due to low registration.

I'm just wondering, you know, I certainly didn't hear anything about it, but I probably didn't look at what was ever online but could you just uh ask them what the content is uh and kudos to view rolls radio team uh they're training the callwood emergency radio team and uh nice vacation for the chief chief said something crazy you'd want to ride a motorbike up there it'll be oh bearably cold.

And one thing I did notice there were no vacation rental issues.

And I don't know if that's because we're not looking for them or we haven't had complaints.

So I was just that's another just curious about that.

But in general, very happy.

All looks good.

Thank you.

Okay, so we just need a motion.

Yeah, just a quick question.

Uh it spoke um in the bylaw division.

Um so it's camping in the parks.

There's apparently an increase.

Is it would I look under parks and public?

Is that where we would be noting the warnings for?

I guess there's no is there are there any warnings for people camping in parks?

So the parking bylaw or the parking bylaw, the camping and parks bylaw is coming to next week's council.

So why don't we just say okay, sure questions and comments for that?

Okay.

I'm not trying to stifle questions, but yeah, I I I also just a an observation that um in the uh chart that shows us the uh number of warnings and tickets.

Um there's no total given at the bottom for the months.

So it'd be nice.

You know, we've got a grand total of 374, but we don't have monthly totals on the columns.

Small point.

Move a seat.

Thank you.

Seconded by Councillor Kowalewich, second.

Okay, everyone's good.

Okay, all in favor.

That's carried.

And then we've got the building department report, which is kind of depressing for June.

My only question on that one is we've got a lot of things on the books, but given the low construction so far, is there any financial implications we need to be worried about since nothing started and there's no money's coming for building permits and all the rest of it.

Lindsay is large on the screen.

Lindsay, go ahead.

Thank you, your worship.

The way that the accounting for building inspection or building permits works is that um the the um a certain amount of the previous year's permits carry forward into this year.

Um under under our under our budget our our budgeting practices so in terms of some of the very large projects etc there is still much work that is happening on them we're just not seeing the same um level of uh new large projects coming in quite yet but we are at the stage now where um there are a few that will be coming in for foundation permits over the next couple of months and then a few months after that i would expect them to be bringing in permits for um the superstructures so we will start to see an increase in those values soon.

Um, but in terms of impact, um perhaps not so much this year, but possible impact for next year, because there won't necessarily be that um smoothing out of the budget that uh or the funds that occurs because we may we may not have as much um from from this year as we have had in previous years.

That absolutely I mean the building permit with the revenue from a couple of the major projects coming up should be quite significant.

Good.

Any other questions from Lindsay?

Okay, move my dice, councillor Rogers, second advantage Matson.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

Thank you, Lindsay.

Um so that is protective services.

So now we have finance and admin, and we'll go straight to 6.23A, which is the budget variance and projects update report to June 30th.

Do we have Don?

Yeah.

Is it Don?

Is there anything in that that you wanted to bring to our attention that you were concerned about, or is it just all there for our information?

It uh your worship, thank you.

It is there for your information.

Let me just turn my camera on.

Um, I did try to highlight one project that I know that our director of engineering can speak to as well under capital projects that um we're we're we're suggesting will not proceed this year.

So if there's any questions about that, we can answer that.

Um otherwise, yeah, we're pretty much par for the course at this point in time once we get in a few um more items um after the end of second quarter um you know we'll start detailing out in the in the months to come where we are seeing uh variances that uh we want to bring to your attention but it's we're just kind of on that cusp where we're getting to that point where we start um you know doing more um more distinct uh projections to the end of the year yeah thank you.

Questions for Don?

Councillor Rogers?

Yeah, thank thank you very much for bringing forward the um uh the details and the island paving.

Uh had we anticipated that um we were going to collect DCCs from uh the BC Transit Project?

Had you had we budgeted for we were gonna use DCCs, not collecting pay for it with DCCs.

We were gonna use RDCCs.

Yeah.

And but it says that it negates uh the use of DCCs.

So we do have to use um casino funds.

Well I'll let staff speak to it, it's probably easier.

I yeah, thank you, Chair.

Um yeah, it's a little convoluted and it's it's quite unique in this in this situation.

Uh we had a dialogue with BC Transit about this, and they're seeking, I believe it's federal funding to uh install the airworks, which includes uh a bit of the a bit of paving, and also in the peripheries uh new sidewalk and new bike lanes.

Um long story short, the the funding agreement and uh basically stipulates that we can't use DCCs for our portion of paving.

So after um careful consideration from engineering staff, we realized that the paving in this direct area is actually not as bad as what it was stipulated to be.

But the good news is that we will be receiving uh funding permitted uh additional bike lanes and sidewalks at no capital charge to the town.

And as for the DCCs that we won't use for this project, we can use for other exciting projects.

Okay.

Just if I may, just further curiosity, yeah.

Thank thank you.

That that is good news and nice assessment.

I uh I appreciate staff staying on top of that.

Um, so how how is when would we start seeing you know road work happening um with the transit project, you know, the public?

Yeah, it's a good question.

Chair, we're working with BC Transit on that.

They there are at functional designs, which is probably around your 75-90 percent.

And um, for the longest time, at least in my files, it looks like they're trying to gear towards uh tendering.

It's anywhere between the summer to and near the end of this year.

Um, based just as just from my uh assessment of the project, it'll probably carry over regardless to next year.

Okay.

Any other questions on the budget variances?

Yeah, no.

Okay, just a motion to receive.

Summit.

Moved by Councillor Mattson, seconded by Councillor Rogers.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

Then we have the action list, which again is just here for our information, and we should email any specific questions to the CEO.

Did have a comment.

Okay, so I'm sorry, I'm assuming all the shaded areas are things that have just been completed between now and the last report.

And I just wanted to compliment staff on what I seems to be a large number of items completed.

So thank you, staff.

Yeah, good.

I noticed that as well that there seemed to be more being completed.

Okay, motion to receive.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

And then we have the strategic strategic plan update.

Did you want to speak to that, Sarah?

Or uh again, anything new is noted in red.

And if there are comments or questions, um, feel free to ask.

There are directors on the on this meeting that uh or in this meeting that can hopefully answer those questions.

And if not, we can get back to you if you require further information.

Go ahead.

Yeah, good question on the um uh busy transit um work.

Obviously, they're um we just heard work on on the rapid bus lanes.

Um, but I'm curious that you know what was it meant by the service improvements to Theus Lake.

Um I know that they've done bus stops, but um have uh I've always been concerned about the frequency of service uh to Theus Lake.

Do we know if that um has been improved?

Well, that's from when we started this strategic plan, right?

Which was the beginning of this term.

Yeah, well, yeah, sure, it has that's what it's not.

Yes, absolutely.

But we don't I don't know that it's improved more since then.

I think transit wanted to see the numbers before they committed to to increasing the level of service.

But there's no doubt from the beginning of this term, whenever when one was uh 2018 that it has.

Yeah, yeah, no, this yeah, that's that's right.

Okay, thank you.

So I just need a motion to receive.

Second.

Okay, all in favor.

Opposed.

That's carried.

We're gonna be out of here in record time for um this afternoon session.

I need to spend a lot of time on the CAO reporting.

A good hour.

Right.

So last up, we have the CAO report, and I will put to the deputy CAO to give us the highlights.

I think you did it last month as well.

I did, and it can be uh relatively speedy.

This one is um quite tidally done, and it is uh highlights from admin.

The annual report is out and it is available for comments or feedback from our public, and we look forward to bringing that back on July 19th for consideration.

We have uh in front of you in the report a photo of a donation that was a picture done by an art teacher at a Squimalth High School, a wedding gift.

And normally we don't take uh too many tangible items like this because we're not really a museum, but uh, this was quite an interesting piece that someone had had in their family for over 65 years.

A picture, a painting of the uh six mile, and it was a wedding gift.

And I thought, well, gee, how much time did you spend there?

But it was a really nice donation, so that was quite quite lovely to receive that.

And it was the best man of the of the at the wedding party, too.

So that's kind of a neat story to go to go with that.

Moving into finance this year, we're back to our pre-COVID levels for property tax collection.

So that is great news, and uh so that's keeping people busy in that department, or we did through the month of June, very busy month, and in development services, as you'll recall, in June, we put in place the zoning for Clintana.

And also right now, what work is happening is a very comprehensive review of the building permit process with a view to updating the building bylaw itself.

And in engineering, capital projects are moving along with the active transportation network plan.

We had the consultation or the public engagement piece happen in late June, and those were well attended events along the bike paths and trails at Portage and Chancellor Park.

So that was good, and great weather for that.

In fact, very warm weather for that, requiring some sunscreen, but they were well attended events.

And I think 30 to 40 people at one and 40 plus at another, so it was quite quite well attended.

Yeah, no, it was good.

I'm sorry?

There you go.

And uh so other projects are happening with washrooms going in, the toilet um pads for Portage Park and Helmkin Centennial Park going in, and um development of road ends.

And in terms of road work and transportation, uh priority lane project is happening on Island Highway with the BC Transit and their rapid bus project moving along, and um other work is happening for improvements on Atkins dealing with the sinkhole issue, Watkiss Way Road Improvements.

Again, and that's the Handy dart project, and the Galloping Goose Realignment, sewer and drain work with the Helmkin Bay Pump Station upgrade, and that notice of award that was talked about now moving along.

And annual maintenance work is still happening.

Parks equipment is being replaced.

And we've also heard word that there's the BC Hydro Grant funding has given funds to the Life Cycles Project Society for some new work, pollinator beds at Welland Legacy Park.

There's a photo in the report to show the work that's going in and happening there.

And that summarizes a lot of activity happening in June.

Thanks, Sarah.

Well, we on the um the new park at Watkus and Burnside.

So obviously that's gonna come be taken to a certain level.

Um, but at some point we have to decide, presumably with some sort of community engagement or something, what we're actually going to do with a skatepark.

So we're not putting escape.

So do we have a plan for that process or what what are what are we envisioning?

Yeah, your worship.

Um the first thing is we want to prep the lands to be able to survive the summer.

What I mean by that is making sure that there's no dust nuisance that come out.

So I think right now we're looking at the uh just doing a quick layer of landscaping like seeds for grass or whatnot.

After that, there will be some sort of engagement that will be planned to determine what the community wants.

And I understand that when I was looking at the action lists the other day, uh, that there was a previous um a staff was going to look at the possibility of a um dog park or playground in the Burnside Waukes area.

So um piggybacking on that, we may also uh utilize that to inform on the engagement process, but uh regardless, yes, the surrounding community will be engaged as to uh what could be done in that area.

Yeah, we had had discussed a dog park at one point.

I don't know whether it's really big enough for a dog park but I think it would be yeah yeah anyway I mean it'll be good that and then we might be able to accommodate everything a small playground area and then a fenced off area for dogs and and just an area where people can sit and hang out but it's um it looks good yeah the trail realignment through there is good I'll relate the stuff thank you and just uh just a quick anecdote uh I did take a look at the the engagement done for Chilco Park I think it was done one or two maybe three years ago and that looked like a good um way of engaging so we'll we might piggyback on that and present it to uh yourselves council and committee in some similar way.

Sure.

Councillor Rogers?

Yeah um I I yeah I am pleased with the um the work on on that the park area there.

Um you know I the way it's been leveled to the road so the access the public access to that that park is is a lot better than I envisioned.

And at some point you know when staff are comfortable we'd be able to put some stakes to show the boundaries or the size of of the park when when you call for uh public input uh we can certainly look at that through the chair um at this point yeah we'll look at the landscaping first see because if you'll notice um on the far end it uh it kind of slopes down at a three to one slopes every yeah.

Every three meters horizontal, it goes down one meter vertical.

So um if we're looking at introducing the public uh wherever it be in playground or dog park or whatnot, uh we'll have to look at it from a safety perspective as well.

So uh once the landscaping is is uh figured out, we'll we'll certainly look at the extents of where we can put this amenity as well as the um any barriers that may be required to improve safety.

And we're gonna put some shade trees.

Any trees there?

Well we can certainly plant trees on that steep slope.

Yeah, that's a good idea.

Running around down there.

Yeah, it's just I believe we just need to worry about the CRD assets that are under the ground there.

So we'll make sure that's uh yeah, that C or D are that smoke is still C RD water.

Right.

Yeah.

Okay.

Good.

Any other questions for the CAO on the CAO report?

That painting looks like um I don't know, just I mean it that'd be it it's nice.

It's great that we have it, but it sort of looks like the six mile is about to play the the lead in in a horror movie or something.

Nightmare on Album Street.

Yeah, that's nightmare on street.

Six mile on the six mile bridge.

Yeah.

It's a sunset.

Uh always is always so if since we're talking about pump station and so forth, um, if I may you worship, go ahead.

The um with some great activity going on with the Helmican um pump station there, is that the prelude to the the whole work on on uh the Helmican station?

Well that's the one we award it.

Yeah, that's right.

Yeah, it's part of the just making sure that the uh the community um sees that their assets that uh move their sewage is done in a manner that uh doesn't uh doesn't break down and cause disruptions in the future.

So it's part of the ongoing maintenance.

Um also just specifically with that pump station.

The idea was to also move some of the valves outside the chamber, um, and that provides advantages from a maintenance perspective.

One one being that you would need a combined space certification to do the ongoing maintenance.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

No.

Just one other while we're we're talking a bit more informally.

Our our roads contract.

There's there's several areas within the town that they're supposed to mow either once or twice a year.

Um, and every year for a long time, we have to remind them on some of them.

And the ones I'm thinking of specifically, of course, are on Burnside and High Street.

Um, so you may just want to have a look at that and see if they're in the but I also noticed one on Glenarley that clearly haven't been um cut.

So I'm just wondering where we're we're at with that.

But the high street one the ditches there are actually kind of bad.

We can certainly look at that at that your worship.

So it's uh Glenarley, ones at Glenary Glen Air I I noticed just some on Glenarley where they have in the past cut them at least once a year right but on on Burnside um in front of our neighbors and across the street and also high street and in front of the Strawberry Vale Hall there's ones that they're responsible to cut at least once a year and I know they haven't done them this year.

Yeah we can certainly look at that I mean I'm I I won't speak in defense of the the contractor I do know that just from our from our park staff that deal with the parks there mowing was done late simply because of the wet weather.

Yeah.

Like I said, I'm not going to speak.

No, no, no, that's fine.

Yeah.

And thank you for the that thank you for get working so quickly on that tree on high street.

That resident was very happy.

That well, actually, I don't know that he is very happy, but he's very happy he got the permission to that huge tree on high, right?

When you're going up high street on the used to be on our heritage tree list, it's a silver maple.

Um, and it lost a massive limb.

Um it wasn't really a windstorm that day.

I think it must have just anyhow, and so he that needed to come off, and then another one was taken off.

And I think he may be pursuing taking the whole tree down.

That's that's correct.

Yeah, he's I think he's going through the tree permit process.

Yeah, yeah, unfortunately.

But when you when you look at where the limb came off the tree, you can really see the rot in the tree.

So it they may be time to let it go.

John?

Yeah uh just picking up on on the point about street maintenance um i'm sure they'll get around to it but uh helmican stewart is one corner that um doesn't get maintained very well by the uh the residents everyone else is doing their job but that's the one corner that needs some assistance stewart they don't intersect oh so sorry uh island view well view well avenue and stewart thank you you're right yeah we'll certainly take a look i don't it's we'll see in the contract with respect to whether the the contractor does that or this whole yeah but yeah i i think it is the boulevard.

Yeah that we take a look and needs it just one since you've got road maintenance we'll be poor Ivan's gonna win.

There seems to be a large number of times when people are in the center in the lanes clean.

And I don't know, like, I mean, maybe since you tell us why why this needs to happen so often.

Like you know, you know, the roads close down, but you know, it's part of it.

There's always somebody there doing cleaning, it seems.

And I'm just wondering if well, I mean, they're just maintaining it to the standards we we set, right?

Of the contract.

You're you're feeling that they're shutting down the road too often.

No, I'm just wondering how necessary like is there a way?

Is it a matter of we need to have it cleaned up that often, or is it the plants that are in there?

If we had a different type of plant, they wouldn't need to do the as much maintenance.

That that's probably the more the point.

Yeah.

Well, I mean, fair enough, I guess, to discuss at some point, but we did just renew the contract on the same level and basis of care.

So again, it's not the care issue, but is it?

I know that's I don't understand.

Yeah, but we've we've agreed to a certain level and and and a certain planting, right?

So we're not going to reopen that all of a sudden.

Well, I mean, with respect, Councillor Batson, you've had this complaint or question for years, right?

And if it's a matter, no, if it's a matter of we need to clean it for the water to flow through, that makes perfectly good sense.

But if it's the type of planting we have in there just is really high maintenance, that's that's when I want to know what the rationale is for all the work that's been in there.

I'm not saying saying we changed the contract.

I'm just I'm just wanting to know what the story is.

Do you want to tackle that one, Ivan?

Or I mean most of the plants in these out here are all perennials, they're not annuals.

Um yeah, thank you, Chair.

We could certainly look at it.

Um, I think if I can if I may clarify, I mean, is is the cons if the concern is that the maintenance vehicles are parked in the middle of the road, uh, for example, during median cleanup or median maintenance, we may see it at um in Island Highway here as well as on Helkin.

Um just like it's not the parking.

Uh they do need to park the the workers need to park there for safety.

Maybe just a clarification or an explanation on median maintenance, what actually is happening there.

And is it anything to do with the specific plants are in there?

Is it or is it it just gets stuff put in there just as a natural stuff gets blown in, etc.

And they have to clean it up every day.

I I I just don't know why they're there so often.

Maybe that I just need an explanation.

They are there all that often.

They go to Rogers.

Just to weigh in on this.

Um my my guess is that uh the plantings that are there haven't changed.

It's just the um perhaps it's in every four-year schedule or three-year schedule when those plants require a more significant pruning to bring them back to uh and all sorts of crap gets thrown into those by drivers and garbage.

It was the pruning that they were doing, but I think it's just something you would expect you know every second.

But most of us are are pleased and content with uh I know you're not saying you don't like it.

I'm just curious.

That's all I was curious why what's happening there.

Okay, so I'm gonna call the question on receipt of the CAO report.

Thank you, Sarah.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

Okay, well, we'll see you at seven.

Thank you, and I think we'll just resume.

So this is a carry on of our meeting, which started at 3 30.

And so public participation is going to come up right away.

So for anyone at home, you want to dial 778-402-9227.

And when prompted, enter conference ID number 510-587-99 pound.

And um, if that's if you wish to speak to any item on the agenda this evening.

And um, we'll just pause for a minute to give people a chance to call in and then we will move move along.

Although is there anyone in the room that wanted to speak to anything under public participation?

No, yeah.

Do we do we have any callers on the line staff?

Your worship, we have no callers at this time.

Yeah.

Well, I think we'll just carry on and um I'm gonna hand the chair over to Councillor Mattson for planning and development.

Uh thank you very much.

So uh under chair's report, I don't really have a chair's report, but an item that came up today uh at the Protective Services meeting, the we had a report transforming policing and community safety in DC, which talked about basically forming a uh sort of rental police force.

But you know, given some of the things that have happened recently, I just wanted to take uh an opportunity to say, you know, I I'm quite delighted with the policing that we're getting here in Victoria or Greater Victoria, and the what we get within the West Shore.

And I just wanted to thank uh all the police and all the various services, including uh Damien and our his colleagues in Sanich for the outstanding work they do.

So thank you for your service.

Uh the first item we have is development permit application with variances for a 1519 Admirals Road, and we have a staff presentation.

Good evening.

Sterling Scory, community planner, going to be doing a presentation for DP 2022-05-1519 Admirals Road.

It's a commercial development permit with former character and it's uh with variances.

Uh purpose of the report tonight is to introduce the application, uh, see comments on the proposal and the variances requested, and to outline any additional information uh that's going to be required for consideration of the application.

Uh bit of background on the site.

Roughly 19,000 square meters.

The proposal is looking to add additional 2,000 square meters of retail and warehouse space and a new garden center.

It's located within the Craig Flower neighborhood in the eastern gateway of the community.

To the north lies Craig Flower Manor, east Sony's Nations, south Nelson Square and Admiral's Walk, and to the west is the Clintana neighborhood.

Sorry, I apologize that I was not sharing my screen.

Sorry about that.

There we go.

Sorry about that.

So on the on the right here is the uh the uh subject site.

Uh this is a site context uh of the uh uh the site.

So where shown in red would be the proposed retail and warehouse expansion, and then the green would be the new uh garden center.

Uh this is a site uh overview of the existing uh existing lots, uh green space and identified development site.

I'll talk a bit a bit more about that uh later in the presentation.

Um this is showing the like I said, the existing uh building as is.

The next slide here shows what the expansion looks like.

It's taking the existing access off of Island Highway and creating a single in out in out lane drywall and taking the parking that's there and placing that parking in the area where the red box is.

Roughly a 30 to 40 percent increase in the warehouse space and roughly 50% increase in the retail space.

The garden center would actually be decreasing by about 100 square meters.

This is an overview of the building from the front building facade.

The existing auto center wouldn't be seeing any expansion.

The one noticeable difference for this upgrade would be the order pickup.

That would be a new feature for this location.

And there is a new building design characteristics for the building.

The auto center that uses this type of uh material.

Um, this would be expanded to have uh where the block is shown with the primary logo sign for Canadian Tire, and then it would also be used where the green uh order pickup uh location is.

So, for discussion around this uh application, um, things to consider would be how the proposal addresses relevant development permit guidelines, uh, how does the proposal comply with the uh C1 commercial zone, and are the requested variances supportable.

With respect to development permit guidelines, uh the design character is met through uh building facade that blends mixed materials and uh main entrance that is easily identifiable.

Through sighting and massing considerations.

It makes it uh front of the building makes uh use of it uh articulation, and the breakup of the building for facade is done through a use of different materials.

Landscaping is provided on the island highway and Ed Balls Road, which provides good screening from those roadways.

For parking access and circulation, electric vehicle parking is being proposed as part of the application, and the excuse me, existing building and future building will have existing pole-mounted lighting in the parking lot and downcast lighting on the exterior of the building.

For further consideration would be the addition of glazing on the outside to break up the appearance of a single wall face on the on the front of the building facade as well as on the exterior sides.

That's something that needs to be discussed further with the applicant at this time, whether there is any future consideration for that.

And I'll discuss it a bit more later on in the presentation.

Proposal to have parking where it is may also conflict with that idea of having if there was an interest in having that as a development site in the future for where the parking is identified, and confirmation for lighting and safety on the site would need to be just ensuring that there's uh septed principles that are followed, as well as making sure that the light that they're proposing is uh dark size friendly.

With respect to the zoning uh compliance, uh there is a few variances that have been identified and some that will need more information.

For those that need more information would be the impermeable surface coverage, the maximum building height, and the height and location of the accessory building.

They've identified that they would like to put a pergolus structure as part of the green space on the site.

More additional information needs to be gathered on exactly where that's sited and the height of that accessory structure.

With respect to parking, the zoning bylaw requires that 280 spaces be provided on the site.

As proposed, there would be 204 spaces.

Loading requirements suggest that there would be or require that seven spaces would be provided on the site, two spaces are provided.

Further information needs to be gathered on the number of small parking provided on the site.

And with respect to bicycle parking, um, there is a shortage of class one parking spaces, and uh that would need to be confirmed uh with the applicant.

Uh just an overview of the uh the variances for consideration.

Uh one thing that wasn't covered was also the maximum sign area for the uh primary logo sign, which is the actual Canadian tire sign on the front building facade.

So a bit of a discussion here for uh consideration in this application is um the parking, which I wanted to go over a bit more with the community.

So, as I said, the required uh parking for the site would be 280 spaces.

The applicant is proposing a cash and loop payment of twelve thousand dollars per stall, and they are proposing 15% of the total required parking, which is 42 uh spaces.

This is in compliance with the zoning bylaw.

However, the variance would be for the remaining 34 spaces that would not be covered in cash and loan.

At peak times.

The one thing that the study did not cover was whether or not the existing parking or the proposed parking rather would be adequate for any future development of the lot.

As I said, there's the possibility that that site gets developed, or potentially other other locations on the site.

In looking at this and considering the potential for the site, staff are aware that there's limited commercial space in this area of the community.

And one thing that council may want to see is if there's benefit in further varying the acquired parking for the site.

Converting the space into parking and instead keeping it as existing green space for the opportunity for future development as was identified in the original development application for the site back in 2000.

As is, the parking study identifies that the site would be adequate with the parking provided.

If council wanted to see what the site would look like and how it function without the addition of those 29 parking spaces, that may be something that we we asked the count uh the applicant to demonstrate.

So, next steps uh further information would be provided for uh council's consideration prior to the application, uh confirming the variances that have been requested and those that have been identified by staff, and staff will continue to work with the applicant to resolve any of the issues um that are identified through this meeting and uh through the report.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And did sorry staff, did you say that a the proponent was here?

Or online?

To the chair.

Uh I believe that the applicant is online, yes.

Um specific questions or does the applicant actually have anything they'd like to add to the report?

Hello, uh, your worship in council.

My name is Andy Gaylor.

I am the uh consultant on behalf of my client, uh uh Canadian Tire.

Um, I think the planner did a very thorough presentation, a very thorough report, and I have uh nothing to add.

Colleagues, any comments or questions?

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

This is one of those very unusual situations where staff is drawing on the experience we've had with another development site that is very overserved with parking in this immediate vicinity, which is why we are suggesting that perhaps a greater variance might actually be a better option in order to preserve the green space that is on the site.

The studies that the applicant has provided indicates that even at absolute peak peak use, there is a great deal of parking on this site already.

And it is unlikely to be in a situation where they are stacking onto Admirals Road or Island Highway during during peak period.

So this is one of those very rare situations where staff are actually suggesting a greater variance might be something that council would consider.

Okay, so what you're also saying is given that there's no other place to park, it's unlikely that extra that the cars will be parking on the street anywhere and then sort of wandering to Canadian Tire.

Exactly.

And that there is already a great deal of parking on this site and it has never even under its current configuration, the vast majority of the parking lot is not utilized.

So it is just it's just paved surface as a result.

So we could increase the amount of permeable surface on this site and green space on this site by preserving that one area at least in the short term until the property owner decides whether or not they wish to move ahead with an additional commercial retail unit.

So there's the th the variance of 34 spaces that's sort of being recommended and with the one number, sorry, is it 25?

Staff would actually recommend an additional variance of uh I believe it's 28.

28.

Yeah, to the chair.

Yeah.

To the chair.

It would be uh a recommendation that um an additional uh 20.

Sorry, I'm doing some math.

In that 29 spaces, there are uh four e-com spots, and there's also two electrical vehicle parking spaces.

I think those would serve a function on on the site.

So the variance would be for the addition of uh 23 spaces.

So 34 and another 23.

Thanks.

So I can yeah, I I have no problem with the parking variances and what what's being suggested because it as you say there's certainly I've never seen an opportunity or any moment when that parking lot is being close to full.

I'm I'm interested in the the possibility for a new retail unit or commercial unit.

Is there a specific part of the property that's being zoned for that?

Or I think that's the green space right now.

Is it?

So that that's it.

So then if they wanted to do new development, then they would have to come back and go through a process to do that at that time.

A future development permit with with um additional variances for parking.

Right.

Okay.

Jamie.

Yeah I'm fine with the parking variance too.

It's that's that's easy.

I was kind of gonna go along the same lines as Maris Breech.

Maybe this question's better for Director Chase given her experience but that whole that whole area is that all owned by community with the strip small there with very green that question might actually be better directed to the consultant.

I don't know what the ownership arrangements are.

Okay.

Uh thank you, Director chase.

It's my understanding that that the property in its entirety is owned by Canadian Tire.

Thank you.

Yeah, I was I was interested in the same and the opportunities, or if there's even any interest, perhaps uh Mr.

Aylor can can speak to that when we have him here, if you know any information about the intentions of uh the current owner uh and if there's um you know a future in a new development and what that would look like.

Uh thank I could speak to that briefly.

I I mean at this point, and again we just received um staff's comprehensive letter uh an a few three or four days ago, so we're still going through it.

Um I think at this point there aren't any immediate plans to to construct an additional CRU.

Uh obviously there's some issues with parking compliance, and there's also will be some challenges to address setback requirements from World Island Highway.

Um but uh again, I I think if if staff and council are looking at um making sure that we're not going to encumber future development opportunities, um, and if council was willing to grant an additional variance, I think that's something that we can certainly uh we can certainly review.

Just a question, do you need the additional 23 parking spots on the CRU site?

And again, that's a great question, and and something, you know, wearing my my city planner hat, um, you know, I'm I'm very excited to see the the council leaning towards additional variances to remove pretty significant parking requirements.

Uh, but we also have to spend time discussing with the store manager and the community entire team to understand the operational requirements and associated parking as well.

So I can't commit to answering that right now, but um uh again, we're we will certainly work with staff to identify ways to ensure that we're not undermining those future development opportunities.

I think recognizing that this is an important uh gateway site uh to the community in a in a prominent corner.

Um so I certainly understand staff's rationale um to find opportunities to to to not shoot ourselves in the foot uh by eliminating those development opportunities.

So that's something that we'll definitely work with staff to uh investigate.

A question just with your developer's hat on if you did put the parking spots in there and a future council decided that was fine to build there the fact that you had parking there that you changed it in parking would it that'd be a big impediment to actually you know digging it up and then putting in a building uh it it's not just parking it's also some I believe we're proposing some stormwater infrastructure as well.

Um I mean easier to remove compared to a a a building, I guess.

Um but again, I I think the first the biggest question that we need to answer is it uh for Canadian Tire is is to what extent do we need uh the parking that we're showing in this plan and and you know if we can get by with less than than operationally then then great.

But uh again that's something that we'll have to confirm before we we go back to council.

Okay.

Just one other quick question on that is when was the last time council twisted your arm to ask for bigger variance?

Uh not not too often.

Thanks John.

Thank you.

Um so how much uh with a new retail and the new um warehouse, how many more staff would do uh anticipate hiring and needing for the operation.

Uh through through the chairperson, um certainly new staff will be required.

I I don't have those exact numbers um off the top of my head, but that is is it is quite uh an increase in in retail uh area.

So uh we will need more staff, but again that's that's a detail I'll have to confirm based uh once I consult with Canadian Tire.

Yeah.

Um where do they park now?

Again, apologies.

I don't I don't have that exact information in front of me, but um I can certainly you know work with uh our Canadian tire team to to see if there's designated staff parking areas.

I don't know if if that's if there are those designated areas or not.

It'd be helpful to know, yeah, you know, because it's um uh you know a 50% increase of uh retail and 30% increase of uh warehouse um will involve more staff and and we don't have anywhere to uh to place them, and I'm not entirely sure that they would be all able to uh take transit or cycle.

In fact, you know, actually having no bike lanes on Admirals is a deterrent to um uh to cyclists uh in that area.

Um so you know, and this is Canadian tire for stores and cars and automo out of uh repairs.

I see that you're also um in having a um um what's what's sorry, what's the terminology?

Um uh pickup, you know, for for individuals be able to pickup.

Uh are you increasing the number of parking for individuals that are uh those transient drivers coming in and out of the curbside pickup parking spots now yeah unfortunately you know this this looks like a um a much more uh with a larger warehouse I would imagine it's uh order pickup and go it's gonna be a lot more of a focus in in the uh which is current to the times um but I would think that you'd have to have a lot more um designated spots for those people picking up not just the two or three that you got now.

I think we have four shown.

Yeah but the the point's well taken.

Yeah um I'd just just jump in or just I'd be curious how long would somebody stay at a pickup spot.

Like I'm a I'm just assuming the turnaround would be fairly quickly not going to be there for 20 minutes.

They purchase something and are just coming to pick it up.

I mean based on based on personal experience that that sounds about right.

Whether or not that differs with Canadian Tire I I'd have to uh get back to counsel on that.

Mm-hmm.

Yeah you know and and uh I've been around since the beginning um you know when we'd uh you know gone through this site and and I don't think we've had any interest at all with um the uh possible CU um development site where you know there's the green space right now and um in my view, it's much more important to um uh make sure that Canadian Tire remains a successful, viable partner in in um in our community.

And part of that is ensuring that there's adequate parking.

A question to you, sir.

Have you compared the um parking with other Canadian Tire stores in Greater Victoria like Langford?

I I don't believe we have.

We do have an internal transportation team who are familiar with with Canadian Tire and their operational requirements province wide.

I don't believe that review has been specific to Canadian Tire stores within the uh capital regional district area.

Yeah.

I think the Langford one's sort of a bad example, just in the fact that there's so much more parking.

Whatever they have designated for Canadian Tire, there's a huge number of spots all around it.

So I don't know if that's what I'm I'm inferring referring to is that the success of Canadian Tire parking um store there in Langford is there is uh enormous use of their parking.

Um it's it's really impressive.

I guess one of my concerns is that um if we do not add parking to Canadian Tire, um, you know, we make a reference to the Rexel drugs that uh you know we gave uh you know uh an extraordinary, you know, they we require a lot of parking for Rexal.

My thoughts is that if Kenny and Tire doesn't cut it and have enough parking stalls people are going to go and ball their Rexall.

They're gonna go and park there.

And um you know granted we have some other parking available um on the site but um you know uh I'm really pleased to see that you're you're um staying and increasing the uh the the business side here in View Royal but um I think you're gonna need the parking and you know I've been there um where I've been concerned with um um you know the pressures on on parking.

So when 50% increase in retail and we're not increasing it, I I would um take quite exception to the um uh the proposal here I think um you're gonna need more thanks John so what I hear from the rest of my colleagues I at least I've got the feeling is that the the variants they're not not too concerned about a variant because they think that it will work given their experience plus the proponent will come back and let us know what they think about the CRU spot to see whether they need yeah with their own internal discussions whether they need those additional parking spots and I guess from my perspective as a business uh they're going to make the decision on what best suits their business and what they can do with.

So I'm sure they're not going to short themselves in parking if they think that's important to their business case.

David I just um yeah, right and and I think we welcome, at least I do, the um the expansion and the expanded commercial tax rate and everything goes with it.

And and the fact that the business is doing well and wants to make that investment.

So I'm happy to see it move forward.

John?

Yeah, certainly I I I've already said that.

Um the I I guess what I'm saying is that it's um with Kineatar to be successful, you're gonna need more parking.

And um I personally don't feel that the um uh the hopes and dreams of having that uh other CEO site built and developed that hasn't happened uh for 20 years is probably not gonna happen.

You're uh Kinanatar is more important and to making sure that you have uh enough uh space for those customers coming in and we're not gonna park them on the street and we're not gonna park them over at Rexall.

So um yeah, I uh I look forward to you coming back with more information on how you accommodate your employee parking.

All right, so thanks.

So I guess you've heard that uh we just need a bit more information uh on the parking plans, especially what your your discussions in terms of the CRU spot.

Uh that council is quite pleased with the expansion and that we look forward to your every success in this venture.

I'll move proceed.

Move second.

All in favor, against carry.

So with that we have a new staff presentation on Altham Road.

296 Eltham, that address is familiar.

Thanks, Jeff.

Thank you, Chair Jeff Chow, Senior Planner.

This is an application for rezoning uh to rezone the two detached dwellings at 296 Eltham and 242 Homkin Road for townhouse multifamily use.

One thing to note to move forward with this application, an official community plan amendment is required because of the uh the requested density right into the purpose of tonight is to introduce it and and uh sort of get a feel for what some of uh count uh committee the whole's uh first impressions may be for this uh proposal.

Uh so the the site is um is designated mixed residential in the official community plan, which supports uh detached homes and small home small lots, townhouses up to three stories with a maximum floor space ratio of 1.2 to uh 1225 to one and low-wise apartments with a maximum floor space of 1.5 to 1, and the zoning bylaw allows additional provision for 0.1 uh to 1 floor space ratio when the underground parking is provided.

So this site is um at corner of Elton and Helmkin and is one of three large residential lots on this side of the road.

And under the official community plan, it's a transition area between greater density through the neighborhood mixed use designation at the Helmkin Island Highway intersection and the single family residential further to the east that leads to View Royal Elementary.

But a development concept helps to provide an idea of what is proposed for the site.

And the details of the farm and character would be addressed in greater detail at the development permit stage if the rezoning is successful.

But this shows what could be built on the site.

And the site concept is for 20 units of townhouse units on in two buildings, and they would be accessed off Eltham Road.

What that creates is kind of a kind of a center laneway between the two buildings that provides private rear yard space for those units, and there would be another row of buildings closer to the single family dwellings to the to the to the north.

These are some renderings of what it might look like.

Showing the Elton Street frontage.

So you can see that it's three stories with kind of walk-up front doors, and there would be a kind of a uh a parking uh formalized street parking in front.

Uh the view from Helmkin Road, you would see the uh the side of the building uh where the where the center laneway is.

Um the the site, uh the neighboring property to the left on on Helmkind Road is single family.

However, that lot is very deep, and these uh this whole row of townhouse units would actually not be but still in the front yard of that lot.

So uh there's while there is some oversight of the front yard, it's not a it's not a privacy issue for um uh for overlook of the the house itself.

This particular location is kind of at the crest of the hill where it's fairly flat.

Um this picture in the lower left hand corner shows uh a little bit of what the view from the from the neighbors uh would look like in these.

There's a a hedge would be there to create uh ground level privacy.

Lower right picture shows the internal courtyard and shows uh how there would be some spaces that that provide some outdoors living space that's kind of uh interactive for the for this little community.

The village density is 1.25 units per hectare for this this lot, and you'll see that it exceeds the uh what the official community plan uh indicates for uh for townhouse type dwellings.

That's because most of them have surface parking.

And when you have um underground parking, there's an opportunity to place uh buildings kind of a different configuration.

Uh in comparison to other recent department um complexes in the area, uh it's it's basically less than half of what you see for new buildings these days, including uh the Royale at two at the corner of Island Highway in Holmkin, which has the greatest at 291 uh units per hectare.

Uh but most of them tend to be uh over 200 units per hectare and this this development site is a little bit less.

The townhouses at 235 um island highway uh are actually at 37.5 units per hectare and that's because uh the site is larger because all the parking is is surface.

In terms of site surfacing uh the road design uh will be reviewed as part of the surfacing agreement.

Uh there will be a requirement for updated sidewalks along both site frontages.

Uh the requirement is also that there be no net increase in post-development site runoff uh s and stormwater must uh enter in the town's drainage mains must meet the requirements of the bylaws and a detailed stormwater management will be required prior to building permit assurance.

In terms of sewer loading, it's the sewer modeling study is not recommended because there appears to be sufficient capacity in the uh in the sewer system.

In terms of tree protection retention, uh there are five trees on the site.

Those would likely be removed because underground parking is provided.

So the thing to look at here is uh boundary trees.

Uh so basically trees on neighboring properties and along the street frontages.

So a tree inventory and arborus report should be provided this time to enable understanding of potential tree impacts.

Uh, what are the conditions of those trees?

We'll be able to withstand construction impacts and what kind of mitigation would be needed to help their retention.

Uh the community MNAD contributions policy target is $4,000 per unit.

So for 20 units that would be $80,000 minus any tangible community energy amenity contributions that council or applicant may want to see.

And then 10% of the amount received would be transferred to the Capitol Regional District Housing Trust Fund to supplement the town's annual contributions.

So one of the things that would be needed is sort of an agreement with the applicant that this will be this will be agreed to.

In terms of the next steps, for the application move forward, an official community plan amendment is required.

And in that process, there is a consideration for early and ongoing notification whenever you amend an official community plan.

And there are some different approaches that can be taken that we can consider when the application comes in in terms of how that consultation would happen.

A covenant would be should be registered concurrently with the zoning to do a couple things.

One is to make sure that the two lots are not sold independently and so it's maintained as one development site.

Road dedication may be required and if if it is then that would be secured as part of the should be secured in in this covenant and a covenant to ensure the provision of the community amenity contributions if there's a cash form that's agreed to with the applicant.

A couple other items the other items include Arbus report for surrounding trees, submission of a sustainability statement form, which is part of our standard application to understand the building uh efficiencies and uh and uh a traffic impact assessment to determine if additional turning storage is needed uh or sight line improvements along Helmkin Road or Railham Road so the recommendation is to uh we see the report and I believe the applicant is um attending online and uh maybe able to address any questions that members of the committee may have before we get to how people feel about the application there are there any specific questions of either staff or the applicant I guess it's partly partly for staff, maybe more for the applicant if presuming that this moves along, I'm curious about the one lot that is not included.

So there's three single family homes on Eltham currently.

Right.

And so this will take two of them, and then you have one sing, and so I suppose it's to staff or the I mean, has there been any consideration of consolidating all of those properties so that they um it could encompass those three lots?

Um yeah, through the chair, um I believe the applicant has contacted the property owner, they're not interested this time.

I believe it there is kind of a uh home, might be a home-based business operating out of there.

Uh, but I believe uh Mr.

Sangera, you may have more information than I do so who is oh Mr.

Sangera's the advocate of uh is he online no he's online yeah that's okay I mean that sort of answers the the question really so I'll start with just thoughts Damien yeah I'd like to see more efforts to acquire and work with that last house to make it a more complete project uh I'm thankful for the interest and always looking to densify in areas like this.

That that uh two lot uh densification may be a bit much but it's spread over three much more manageable and I like the idea of developing that area with the four corners.

David Yeah I I the the general proposal I don't have because it fronts on Eltham I think I'd have difficulty if it was extending further down the hill but I think because it's it's on Eltham it it addresses that missing middle that we've been hearing so much recently.

So I'm supportive of the the general concept, but I think it would make far more sense if if we can involve that third property somehow.

Okay, thanks, John.

Yeah, uh as far as the OCP amendment of um FSR 1.6, I'm not supportive of.

Um I I would be curious to question the staff, if this were an apartment of 1.6, um how many apartment units would that be and how many, you know, any anticipated number of cars that would be?

The general concept, but I think it would make far more sense if we can uh through you the chair.

Uh this uh table is kind of uh probably the the best uh way to sort of estimate what the potential density number of units might be.

Uh so this parcel is almost sixteen hundred square meters, and uh so the other buildings that are in the area that are roughly the same uh size are the Maya London at 280 Island Highway and the Skyview, which is under construction.

Both of them have 37 units and this proposal has 20.

Uh in the case of apartment buildings the number of parking spaces depends on how many bedrooms there are uh but typically the parking requirements for apartments tend to be smaller because the it tend to be one or two bedrooms whereas the townhouses are three bedrooms so we have a uh a higher parking ratio parking requirement I just have one other question I do through to staff I'm just curious that so again if this does move ahead with the zoning we put on it, will we be able to ensure that it does actually become townhouses or attached housing rather than down the road being flipped to uh condominium or apartment development?

Uh through the chair, yes, the in the zoning.

Uh this would be a new zone because if we don't have a zoning of this this type for this type of density, and when you create the zone, then you can specify the town the types of uses.

Uh so in this particular zone, it could be something that says attached residential or a residential townhouse.

Uh, and that would that would prohibit apartment use.

That's a very different type of building form.

Um, and the difference is that townhouses are ground-oriented entrances, individual entrances, whereas the apartment is not.

Okay, thank you.

So, John, have you clear?

Yeah.

I'm sorry to interrupt you guys.

I mean I'm I'm so sorry.

This is uh Jeff Singera uh here.

I I I couldn't get on earlier.

Uh uh I I I am on here now to answer any any questions.

I'm sorry about the technically challenged uh fellow that I am.

Okay, so if we do have any questions we'll we'll put them forward to you.

I guess one of the questions was is there any likelihood of you being able to purchase the third building on or the third uh lot on the street and make this one big comprehensive development rather than just a two lot development.

Thank you for the question.

Uh we we tried earnestly to include that house.

Uh we negotiated uh uh quite uh strongly but he did not want to sell and is uh in fact he just spoke with me uh a month and a half ago or so and he said that he actually bought the house that's zoned single family residential right beside the length of uh the house on the north side and he said that he wants to do his own development on that on the home that he's there living in plus the additional one that is in um that's in the current single family zoning so uh I would have loved to have tried uh to have included that in the in the parcel but uh he he did not want to he did not want to sell thank you johnny can you yes thank you so um one of the things that uh concerns me and and i i'm i'm pleased that you've um noted that a transportation study is necessary um is it just a matter of of um assessing whether turning additional turning storage um is adequate and i'm not quite sure what you mean by additional turning storage can you explain that um yes, Jeff, Jeff here.

Um and i can can jump in if if you'd like to.

Um it has to do with the uh looking at whether additional left turn lanes are needed on Helmican Road.

So is there a will a left turn lane be needed on helmkin to enter this enter Elton Road?

Uh that's that's something to uh to look at.

So we're gonna see if there's a possibility of being hitting uh getting a left turn lane and left turn out on Helmcken.

Is that the idea?

It's it's um looking at whether that is required or not.

Hmm.

It's an interesting point because uh this is only one half of the street that's gonna get developed.

You know, we could be looking at um um not 30 or 40 cars, we could be looking at 60 or 80, um, all trying to get out into that little street on busy Helmican Road.

And it it it's because I guess the concern the elephant in the room is is transportation.

I know that um uh the staff report makes uh note of um being compliant on on uh supporting walking cycling and transit transit but um we still got to get those cars in or out and um my understanding is that the people that live there today with just two houses um you know at times it was very difficult to get in and out and um so whether or not we need a dedicated left turn lane right turn lane um you you uh make mention of uh the um uh number of units per acre for Lions Cove the interesting thing for Lions Coves they they got a rear entrance so they've got an egress out and um and I think that's shared with the uh the townhouses but um you know it they can only do a write in right out um my my concerns is that if they're not going to be able to do the left in left outs on Helmaken, interesting idea, then they're gonna have to do a write out, which means they'll have to go down Rudyard and Stormont and and around that way, much like we would uh we expect um uh the um uh the Royale development to do the same so putting considerable pressure on on uh our on our neighborhood so um um is it fair to say that the uh transportation study is going to take into account um the impact on the community in that regard?

Perhaps the director of engineering may maybe answer better than I myself, but the primary concern is safety and visibility.

Yeah.

Thank you, Jeff.

And through the chair, it's uh it's more about getting the right people in the room to determine what kind of impacts uh the development may have uh with respect to um egress and and entrance through Elpham Road.

So um the reason why we have asked for this is to give us a better understanding of the impacts, and at this time uh we won't know what our options are until um that report comes into place.

Yeah.

And and when when we were speculating, neighbors and I on on Eltham and and the future development um we had a little walk around with uh lions cove and um their um their uh thoughts and requests i'll bring this to the table is that they would like to be able to have a left in left out on island highway um so that they wouldn't have to bother with uh eltham and that certainly would help take the pressure off of uh I think John Mr.

Chair we're getting way off topic we're on land use for Elton Road.

So John what do you think of this comp project?

So I guess what I'm thinking of this project yeah what I'm thinking of this project first you know the design aspects um worry me that little bit in the in the middle um is uh is interesting but um practically you know when you see how narrow it is you can't even get two people to walk down the the the little laneway or whatever it is um that uh you know I wonder how practical that is um I'm concerned about um uh the uh the presumption that this very tall building right to the edge uh can overlook 340 um uh Helmaken um you know with with a you know three-story building towering over them and um just because the house happens to be at the very back right now it doesn't mean that uh there's going to be a future house that's gonna have to be subjected to um uh all those individuals looking down upon them.

So I think um that's an impact on on the neighbors.

Um and I I still have a problem with the FSR, and there's a lot of transportation issues that uh that we cannot ignore.

Um it's gonna have an impact on the overall community.

And from my perspective, the density is just way too much for those two lots and in terms of those buildings.

If if that's this is an example of what a transition area is.

I mean, I think it would really detract from our community if that's the sort of densities and what these things would look like.

As it is, I just think it's too dense for what it is.

So I'm I can't see myself supporting that.

You know, if the neighbors come out and they're all happy with it, but uh I mean, I I just think it has to be reduced in in scope, but it's just too much for me.

I'll proceed.

Second all in favor against carry uh but for the proponent I'm not sure you're gonna have to do some work with staff because well it sounds like there's yeah two and two in support and two opposed from from this table at any rate yeah well okay no doesn't all right uh Bill 26 amendment or bill twenty eight X that say glasses on bill twenty six amendment overview.

No.

It's uh uh Sterling Square community planner.

Uh back for a second presentation.

Uh to the chair, it's bill bill twenty-six um amendment.

Um this is actually following up on a council action item um from the past that was to provide some more information on establishing establishing an approach to uh public hearing process for rezoning applications.

Um bill twenty-six was uh two amendments that were done to the community charter and local government act.

Uh those are now in effect.

They are part of legislation that we have to follow.

Uh the changes look to review the public notification methods for local governments, public hearing requirements for rezonings, and also review the opportunity for councils to delegate authority to staff for minor variances.

So with respect to public notification methods, currently we have three typical application types: our amendments to our official community plan, zoning bylaw, also permits for temporary use permits, industrial permits.

The delivery method would be a mail out or hand delivered, and also publication in a newspaper.

Those are two methods that are consider uh were considered legitimate and required through the local government act.

And the notice area for those was 400 meters for applications to be uh either residential, commercial, a comprehensive development, or an industrial use, and 100 meters for uh things that had to do with public use, institutional uh transportation and parkland with uh development governance permits uh same delivery method uh mailed or delivered uh in person and newspaper ads and a hundred meter uh notification distance on the subject property and then finally uh development permits with variants uh the exact same process the new legislation uh now allows local governments to adopt their own public notice bylaw what this allows is that a local government that means we're getting there.

Sorry, um, so local governments may select two uh or more public public uh publication methods that they feel are appropriate for the community and provide adequate notice for uh applications and for public hearings.

Possible methods for uh notification include existing methods such as the newspaper notifications uh or ads, uh as well as uh new methods like website uh postings, uh mailouts, online newspapers, and um other other forms of of social media.

So in in reviewing this this change through legislation, what is currently being done is is okay, but council may consider some of these questions that are up on the screen here, and whether or not we could uh be more effective in in reaching our public with uh development applications in the types of methods that we do that uh are we effective in using newspapers um is there other opportunities to explore through online notifications um email blasts uh using the website um and this is something for for a discussion um i do have more of my presentation so we can we can continue on or we can have a discussion here, but yeah, everyone's happy so far being yeah, I I mean i think any way we can encourage communication with the public about variances is a good thing.

A lot, and I think it's fair to say most residents, uh variances and development permits aren't on the top of their list of things to worry about unless it's in their neighborhood, and then it gets their attention, right?

I I mean I've heard so many stories, and I mean these these guys here heard it all about oh my god, I didn't know there was a development going on down the block.

What what happened, right?

I mean, you just you hear this all the time, and it's not perfect, the system's not gonna be perfect, but I do see the Twitter uh tweets, and it's it's like a one-liner, and you you click the link and opens up.

I would really like to see more of that, whether it's Facebook or Twitter, and just simple language.

Like proposed development in your neighborhood, something to that extent, right?

I know the city of Victoria, they have got these new fancy signs.

You guys have probably seen them.

And they're very simple.

And I think Sanich is starting to do them too, but it's very simple language, and anybody can understand it.

I I like that.

David?

So I'm I'm just curious.

Are you saying now then that we could, if we chose to say continue to do the direct mail out?

Because we're pretty good with that.

And do the social media and the town's website and leave it at that.

We we can we can gong doing newspaper ads which cost thousands of dollars and arguably nobody sees them.

That is correct.

Yes, we finally have this opportunity.

Right.

Okay, thank you.

John?

Um I agree that I don't see this that many people um um subscribing to hard paper um at times colonists.

However, there are the online newspapers.

Um Steph, you've mentioned that, and I think that's certainly worth um uh including as a as a reach out of besides the Twitter, the Facebook, and and and easier English language.

Yeah, we also have the mail notes where we can just And the mail notes.

Yeah.

Sorry, the emails outside.

So what what is happening around the region is that municipalities are being asked to identify two or two or more.

Two or more methods by which we will always notify people of.

So online newspaper may be one of those options.

It would be very, I think, important for us to understand what the um circulation, circulation rates are of those, or or at least the number of hits that they get on a weekly basis in order to understand whether or not that is a useful way of of communicating with people.

And I I do note that an online newspaper is not targeted.

So direct mail is our most targeted way of being able to notify people.

And the town's website, I think, because of its RSS feed and the ability to then subscribe to that, gives you far more direct access to those who have a vested interest in what's happening in View Royal.

So those would be the two methods that staff would recommend as our as our choice one, choice two.

And then we can we're certainly willing to have have conversation about what the other what the other modes might be.

But we certainly noticed that during the pandemic in particular, it was so challenging because many newspapers went to just circulation once a week.

So we we we moved away from the Gazette because of that.

Um, because the the legislation is set up that you have to notify in two consecutive issues of a newspaper.

And if newspapers only printed once a week, we actually don't have enough time between our two council meetings to guarantee that notification is going to occur.

Thank you.

I think I would also like to suggest there's um the two methods that are proposed by the director may be best in that we control them rather than relying on outside agencies that may have not as much depth in terms of their operations or their capacity.

So I would express a a concern or a note about that as well.

So I don't hear anybody being upset that we skip the newspapers.

And if we have uh direct mail and the the one in then it's just as easy to throw on the town's website and a couple of other things, you know, some of our regulars.

So we look forward to, I'm assuming that we just look forward to you coming back to us with a recommendation on that.

So we'll come back, I suppose.

Yeah, quite a comment.

Yes, thank you.

So um I'm not quite sure, but it I have the impression on the town's website that it's a it's a chronological time thing with only a limited space to view.

So if you've got um five what's new or five notices, um when the sixth one comes on, the active one that's still active, disappears from view.

So it could be that you know that our our website um, you know, is people look at it and they they just let see what's on the front page there, but something may disappear that's a notice of something that's gonna happen next Tuesday, but it's gonna fall off.

So there's the chronological listing that um we have to be careful of, and maybe we need to redesign to make sure that that uh notice, if we're gonna use the website, doesn't do that.

We'll certainly take a look at that and see, and and and we'll we'll note that as an operational issue that we need to address.

Do you have enough on that issue from the council or committee?

I believe we do.

The next step, just as a heads up, will be a bylaw, because that is the new requirement is that uh council identify by bylaw what the uh the the two methods are.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay, so moving on.

Uh the second item is the uh review of uh public hearing uh sorry, uh the ability for uh public hearings to be uh no longer required.

So this is the current uh method uh for which a public hearing occurs.

Um public hearings would be applicable where there's an OCP bylaw amendments, zoning bylaw amendment, uh land use contract current termination.

Uh of course, the the purpose of a public hearing is ultimately to allow public to make representation to their local government, to council.

The council members have had the ability in the past, and what is currently done by V Royal to waive a public hearing.

The new legislation now no longer requires the public hearing to be held.

It is by default not required.

Understanding that if a public hearing is not held, an advanced notice has to be given prior to first reading.

Ultimately, that would mean likely process-wise, staff would be looking for a decision point from counsel at a COW meeting, community of the whole, whether or not a public hearing would be held in order to provide advanced notice to the public that a public hearing was going to be held at uh sorry after second reading, or whether a count uh a public hearing was not going to be held, in which advanced notice would have to be given prior to first reading.

I can repeat that if that was confusing.

No, just from my perspective, I just don't see any benefit to the public of not continuing our public hearing process, but I don't know what my colleagues think.

I concur.

So if I'm understanding this correctly, it's now switched so that we have to make the request that there be a public hearing.

Through the through the chair, correct.

Yes.

So the the way that the legislation reads now is that they any public hearing would not be required so long as the rezoning application is consistent with both the official community plan and uh the zoning is consistent with the official community plan, um, which is has been the case previously.

Um, the big change is just the wording in the ability to wave and now default not required.

Yeah, I guess for me, I mean I can see why urban centers would think this was great, and I can even see that it would make sense in downtown Victoria or Vancouver to be able to take advantage of it.

But I think for us we need to continue doing our public hearings.

So Lindsay's got her hand up.

Yeah, so um what what this still means though is that staff do recommend that we amend our bylaw to provide, uh, which is our our development procedures bylaw, to provide two possible routes for council to be considering.

Because there have been a few situations where council has decided to waive the public hearing on on various um housekeeping amendments, those types of things that we we bring forward on a periodic basis.

And in that situation, what would happen is that the notice would be provided to the community prior to the bylaw receiving any any readings.

And what that is is basically a notice that some bylaws are coming up you might want to take a look, um, as opposed to a notice of a waiver of public hearing.

It's a notice that something is is going to change.

So how's that different from what we currently do?

Right now, the process is we do first and second reading.

Council sets up either sets a public hearing date, option one or skip them waives the public or waives the public hearing so you do that after second reading the way the legislation works now is you would actually have to make that determination before you ever give a bylaw readings and what you are then doing is noticing the public that a bylaw is being considered and so what what the the advantage to it is that the public is actually engaged earlier in the process so that's that's the that's the kind of push pull.

Um but it does eliminate the public hearing, but it doesn't mean it, but it still means that the public can come in and make representations in chambers, write letters, um, what however however they choose to communicate with you and with staff, but they have a little bit more time to do so.

So what do we what do we legally have to do?

Like, is there a requirement now that we for every public for every rezoning or OCP change that we uh say that we actually want to go to a public hearing?

If we say that we want to go to a public hearing, then yes, we will we will continue on with our process as as it's currently set, which is we do first and second reading and then we notice the public that a public hearing is their opportunity, that their opportunity to come and speak is coming up yeah yeah but it would be a little bit sooner now than than before done yeah um I'm still a bit confused myself I like I don't know what the law does the just a does the law require us the new way the law is written for us to say normally we just go the public hearing process but at the start now we have to say that we're going to public hearing or not going to public hearing to the chair correct because because the legislation reads that it's by default not required.

Okay.

Count uh by bylaw saying it's required all the time.

That would we still have to come up and say so I've got it.

So what is staff suggesting though?

They're suggesting the two paths that we could we could so there will be one path where you make and and in each path you are still making an early decision, public hearing, no public hearing.

But we still do that now for those like ones that we think are really minor.

We except after second reading, we would then say we're not going to go to public hearing.

Exactly.

And then there's some sort of notification process.

And we still, yes, we still we still do notification even when a public hearing is waived.

Got it.

So what what this does is it just places that notification in advance of the of any bylaw readings.

Thank you.

Um I'm very uneasy with that.

That um uh you know we we presume that that um uh residents hang by every word and every action that the town does and they're watching and waiting.

They get they're very busy.

And um, you know, the the distinction of whether um, you know, we're we're thinking of waiving it or we're gonna waive it, and they don't know what that means.

They they may still think that they're gonna have that opportunity to come and and present their views, and when all of a sudden at the first reading we pull the rug out from underneath them.

Now I don't that let me finish.

I think the difference is one the province has already said it.

Yeah, I know.

I mean it's a bad province law, you might think, but I guess staff is just saying we don't really have a not we don't have a choice.

Yeah, to the chair, correct.

The legislation is already in effect.

Yeah.

So that's a legislation.

And so since we have a choice, can we make a policy to document that choice?

So I I just uh I have a question.

That staff is going to bring forward so that the council can choose one of two possible avenues.

So surely that's a good solution for each for each fine.

Yeah.

No, I no, I I think it's there's there's an inherent risk um that we're you know the the um you know the current situation is that it's a really a seldom situation where you know a one offs usually by staff recommendations that you know and we agree it's a it's reasonable to waive the public hearing but you know in this instance and and um and i i worry that um you know council will waive a public hearing and um create an an issue for those neighbors that in in that area okay but what staff has said that at the beginning of a development proposal the project you know when the at the proposal at a stage we have to make a decision to have a public hearing or not have a public hearing before we go to any readings so we have to make a decision anyway that and what you're saying is so that's what we have to do legally you're just gonna put it in yeah in place in the of a policy and it's by law yeah and and further to that it sounds to me like any member of council could make a resolution at any time to waive a public hearing if they chose to right if that's becoming the default position.

Yeah yeah and actually the the language wouldn't even be to waive a public hearing it would be that we are we are choosing to not have we are choosing to have or not have a public hearing right right because you're because you're not being born yeah the the requirement no longer exists so yeah so John I totally agree with you that I think it's a bad provincial law but it's a provincial law yeah yeah I think it's incredibly uh um well it's not serving the public at all so repeat that one today what's next chair if I may the the bylaw that comes back to you will have both in it and not not for a choice but to include both in it because there will be times where you will not want to have yeah a public hearing.

So it's not that you will be having a bylaw in front of you that's choose option A or choose option B.

It'll be a bylaw that's you will have a bylaw that has both scenarios that will apply at different times and in different situations.

So as the director mentioned, you know, when we're doing the housekeeping situation or just minor things that we're doing, and it's not a land use necessarily uh application, or it's a really minor land use situation where it is compliant with the OCP and it's not impacting anybody.

And we would suggest not having a public hearing, then you will want that opportunity.

I also heard staff say even if we don't make a bylaw, we're still required to say what's going to come to a public hearing on that before it goes to reading.

So yeah.

So I don't think it was a matter of of us beating that one to death.

Now I understand it, whereas before I was confused.

So thank you, Staff.

I understand it.

Okay.

Number three.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah.

Yes, number three.

So the third uh the third uh change was for the ability for council to delegate authority to staff to approve a minor variance.

Through the existing process, council may uh vary uh vary provisions of the the bylaw that that's zoning bylaw, sign by law.

There is also an option for applicants to go through board of variants, however, their scope uh of what a variance would be would be uh considered a minor variance, and that is uh determined by the board.

Um, a board cannot vary use or density.

Um that's that's an application for rezoning or an amendment to the zoning bylaw.

The new method uh that has been uh again, this is this is legislation, current current legislation, is that council may delegate the authority to staff to grant a minor variance.

In this case, uh, minor variance is uh is as outlined one through four, and some examples on the side there.

A very key point here is that a variance minor variance would never vary use or density.

Um so in number one, the sighting size and dimensions of buildings or other structures or the uses permitted on that land would be uh as I've shown on the on the right hand screen there, right side of the screen would be uh the height of a building or the size of a secondary suite.

Uh with respect to off street parking and loading requirements, that may be uh the number of parking spaces.

Uh regulations of sign uh signs may be the size of a sign, and finally the you know, screening or landscaping uh would be maybe the the type of vegetation.

This is not all examples, this is just uh to highlight some of some examples that may come about.

Um what council may consider in this is whether they they see uh a benefit in delegating this authority to staff.

Um what council considers minor.

This is going to vary um uh considerably between I think different members of council.

So this may may require some more information for staff to provide uh with a report, which is what we are going to be doing regardless, coming back with a report detailing um what council may consider, or if if council decides now that they they don't want to pursue this method, that's that's or this option, that's fine.

And another thing would be if there's certain types of applications that that council sees repeatedly come in that they may want to see delegated to staff for approval authority.

This may be, for example, uh secondary suite uh variances to increase the size of secondary suites.

Uh, an example for what a minor variance could be would be that um the minor variance could vary the size by by 10 meters, and that that delegated authority could go to staff to say um we don't need to go to council for that, but after 10 meters square 10 square meters we may have to go to council for uh a variance again if if we need more conversation around this more than happy to to talk about it okay so we'll go to first point to our colleagues want to change just my initial reaction is we don't get that many for me to think that it it's a big issue big issue for staff time and I'm just as happy to go on for what I like the way we're doing I don't know so let's just help people feel whether we need a change before we decide on what the change should be.

Damien, you almost need to speak.

They're all pretty fair I'm I do have some concern about building height, though.

That one was the only one I was kind of skeptical of.

I mean, I assume it's referring to like minimal building height variance as opposed to multiple stories, but still maybe you can elaborate on that one.

Through the chair.

Yeah, just to confirm again, it wouldn't vary uh density, so you know, floor space ratio, uh, we wouldn't see any type of change in use.

The the intent with the delegation of authority to staff is largely to uh relieve the approval process by which we'd go be regularly going through council to free up um council's time to uh process other applications.

Um, in my experience working in West Kelowna, there was numerous applications that came in through council that requested variances for the size of secondary suites, the height of the maximum height of carriage homes, where we were seeing upwards of 20 to 30 applications a year.

By allowing that delegation of authority to staff, that relieves some of that time from council.

Thank you, Chair.

So more more specifically to Councillor Kowalit Kowalowich's question, I I think that really there is the ability for council to carefully craft the types of variances that they want to delegate to staff if that is a topic of interest and that they they don't.

So if you are if you are concerned about um height and you want to make sure that uh an additional story triggers council review, we would set the process up to accommodate that.

If it's uh something like you want to express it as a percentage, you know, uh staff can approve up to a 10% uh variance.

Um and we're willing to delegate that, provided that it does not uh trigger the additional story, then the delegation I believe can be set up to be that carefully scoped um to ensure that council's interests are are maintained.

I guess just to sum it up for my colleagues I'm I'm actually I'm comfortable with with staff looking and approving minor variances in the interests of moving development along of course it would need to be quite thoughtful and we would agree on parameters but uh if this is sounding like it's something that's becoming the norm uh in British Columbia and then I'm open to accepting some of them yeah I I pretty much agree with what um Damien said word for word.

I'm I'm more than happy to look at it.

Um I I think it makes sense for minor variances.

I mean, I would even go further and say that in some cases staff should be able to um approve development permits.

But at any rate, on on this on minor variances, I'm certainly happy to um look at it.

It's gonna take forever to go determine what a minor variance is.

Well, I agree that's a big part of the problem is what you know.

So is from seven to four parking spaces minor?

I don't know.

But yeah, that's obviously the big discussion.

I just yeah.

I mean, we could spend more time fine tuning that than just doing all variations for a year.

That might be true.

Yeah, John?

Yeah.

Um, let's have a look at it.

Um and what the difference is.

I mean, if we was uh just uh as um we've heard um uh a variance of 10 percent, something like that, where over and above it's um it's calling um uh then yeah, maybe that that's uh case where it comes to council.

Regulations of signs is a good example where I'm happy staff doing it.

You know, that's um I don't uh usually whatever staffs are recommending on the regulations of signs is perfectly fine.

So um I wouldn't uh have any problem with that.

Um secondary suites again, that's that's a percentage thing.

Um number of parking spaces.

Um I remember there being uh a board of variance issue um recently where this neighbor wanted to you know raise the property so we could increase the number of parking.

So basically it was a yeah, it was reasonable you wanted to add the number of parking stalls, but he wanted to take down trees and fill in uh fill in property where the uh sort of is um it wasn't just the number of parking spaces it was a total aggravation to the neighbors so the definition of minor in that regard is a um I I think an important thing and I don't think we'd want to um I think we certainly want to be able to have um uh level of sober second thought um disrespect to staff but you know the the one thing about councils that we're closer I think to to neighbors and and um because we're their residents are our neighbors and we live here, so we have a responsibility, I think, in a in a different way to to hear, even if it's considered minor in a technical fashion.

Maybe major to the next door neighbor.

I just for example we're talking about heights, you could put an extra two meters on, you're not getting another story, but you're sure gonna have some upset neighbors when they find out the building's gonna be six.

So the I guess the issue is we need to really maybe you can limit, I mean, throw up some of the things that are potentially controversial when it comes to to minor.

And we could just start up minor, and then if we have lots of those other things that you're talking about, it's probably easier to add on to minor in the future than it is to start taking away from those.

Yeah.

Okay, so you probably have enough room from that.

I think just the other comment is that unlike Kelowna, we don't get 20 or 30 coming in.

Well, yeah.

Well though, once we allow carriage houses.

Oh, absolutely.

And we want to call those minor.

Okay.

So motion to receive it.

Steve the second.

So motion to receive.

All in favor against carried.

Oh, where are they?

We're lost now.

D.

There we are.

Stewart Avenue.

London Road, aren't we?

Oh.

Oh, John said to me then.

That's E.

This is D.

Um 335 Stewart Avenue.

Thank you, Your Worship.

What did the presentations get from?

They weren't when I was looking.

This is okay.

Okay, that's why.

Yeah.

Right.

Okay.

This is a an app uh application to rezone a property, uh detached residential property to permit envision to create a larger house uh with a total floor space of 550 square meters.

Um the uh existing house is 201 uh square meters.

It's currently zoned and this sorry, 335 Stewart Avenue, just a little context again, is um is a large property at the end of south end of uh Stewart Avenue that has uh water frontage on Esquinalt Harbor and uh and the proposal is to uh zoned R1 residential large lot and the proposal is to increase the the maximum floor space.

So the floor space ratio which is the size of the building relative to the size of the lot in the R1 zone is 0.42 to 1.

This particular parcel uh uh is proposing a house that's 550 square meters that would be a floor space ratio of 0.14 to 1.

So in terms of floor space ratio it um it uh complies with the existing zone however the maximum floor space is the cap no matter how large the property is, is 372 square meters.

So this would exceed that uh and and um uh some members of council may remember about uh 2010 there was a development permit to rebuild the house and to increase the maximum floor space to 695 square meters, which is even larger.

But that permit lapsed.

The current zoning bylaw required to find maximum floor space as a density measure for lot, so it cannot be varied, can only be increased through rezoning.

A lot of it is here, almost half the property is within a development permit permit area, the uh natural water natural shoreline and water course development permit area, uh which is a 15-meter uh development development permit boundary.

Uh the site has had a number of development permits made in the past to uh for to allow a dock and the wharf and kind of the boat house on top of the wharf uh that was uh before a council earlier this year.

Um in this case, the addition is proposed at the north end of the house uh existing house for several reasons.

Um it's outside the development permit area.

Uh there are a number of archaeological sites on the property that kind of affected the previous proposal to rebuild the house because the cost to address that was very significant.

And it's this is the location that has the least tree impact.

This era photo kind of shows you know what the what the site coverage is like in terms of large trees in the area.

There do appear to be two trees near the addition that would have to be addressed, but uh but overall um this the the proposed garage, sorry, it's proposed um addition is in a location that uh that minimizes impact on the site and complies with the uh two-meter side yard setback requirement and is accessible to the driveway, which because it's only got the one entrance from Steward Avenue.

The site servicing there's supposed to be not much impact to the sanitary and storm drain uh system, however, on-site storm water management for the additional imprvious surface will still be required, and a storm monitor management plan would be required prior to building permit assurance, just like any other house that's built.