Public Hearing

Good evening, everyone, um, and welcome.

This is all a bit brand new because we're this is our first meeting that we're webcasting, and this isn't really the public hearing or the council meeting, this is the public hearing, and I'll have a bit more to say about the webcasting in the council meeting.

But I will very shortly give you instructions on how to call in for the public hearing if you would like to.

So I'm gonna call the public hearing to order, and I need a motion to approve the agenda, please.

So moved.

Thank you.

All in favor, opposed.

That's carried.

And then I have rather a long statement that I'm afraid I have to read, but that does include the instructions on um on how you're gonna call in.

So this public hearing is called to order.

It is being convened pursuant to the Local Government act and is being held under the auspices of Ministerial Order M192 due to the COVID 19 pandemic and the public health officers' orders prohibiting gatherings in excess of 50 people.

The proposed bylaw has been introduced and has received second reading of counsel.

Before the bylaw can be legally adopted by council, it must receive two more readings.

Your input via the public hearing process is most important to counsel in making a decision.

At this public hearing, any person who believes that their interest in property is affected by the proposed bylaw shall be given an opportunity to be heard.

However, it is important that all who speak at this meeting restrict their remarks to the matters contained in the bylaw, and it is my responsibility to ensure that all remarks are so restricted.

We will hear a brief presentation from staff, and if there are questions or information from the consultants on behalf of the applicant, and then we will hear from the public.

So at that time, which will be coming up, it'll come up fairly quickly.

If you wish to provide comments by telephone, and this information is also on the website, but you call 778 402 9227.

So that's 778 402 9227.

And when you're prompted, you enter conference ID 698 462 682, and then the pound sign.

So that's 698 462, 682, and then the pound sign.

And staff will we will identify you by the last four digits of your phone number.

We'll ask you to be muted until you're going to speak.

And when you go to speak, you need to press star six to unmute yourself.

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

Members of council may, if they so wish, ask questions of you.

However, the main function of council members this evening is to listen to the views of the public.

It is not the function of council at this public hearing to debate the merits of the proposed bylaw with individual citizens.

Like all public hearings, 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.

After this public hearing has concluded, the council may, without further notice, give whatever effect council believes proper to the representation made at this public hearing.

The public is reminded that after the public hearing, council cannot hear any new information until the decision about the application is made.

Thank you.

Staff.

Thank you very much, your worship.

This is Lindsay Chase, Director of Development Services.

I'm about to read the notice of advertising for this public hearing.

So the notice that advertised this public hearing was posted on the notice board at the town hall on June 25th, 2020.

The notice that advertised this public hearing was also posted on the town's website on June 25, 2020.

The notice was mailed to 539 residents on June 26, 2020, within a 400-meter radius of the property.

The notice was also advertised in two consecutive issues of a newspaper, being the Times Colonist on Tuesday, June 30th, and Thursday, July 2nd, 2020.

Thank you very much.

I do have a PowerPoint presentation if council would like to see it.

Yes, please, go ahead.

Okay, so the purpose of this uh this uh rezoning application uh is to uh uh uh rezone the property at 107 uh Cheltenham Street.

And it is uh being rezoned in order to add additional floor space to the property.

You'll see on the slide, which is slide two of eight, the original lot configuration actually included a portion of what is now the Galloping Goose Trail, and as a result, the property is slightly smaller than what is allowed for under the current zoning.

Next slide, slide three.

Um, the proposal is to fill in uh what is right now an unenclosed carport on the front of the house, and the stated purpose is to expand the amount of floor area available so that a home office can be added to the house.

The official community plan uh land use designation for this site is residential, which would allow for detached houses, townhomes up to two and a half stories with a maximum floor space ratio of 0.6 to one.

The property is currently in the R1B zone, which has a minimum lot size of 600 square meters, and the property is currently substandard to that size.

The proposal is to rezone to the R1C zone, which is an existing zone, which allows for a minimum lot size of 360 square meters.

And this would also then facilitate the enclosure of the carport and the addition of floor area to the property.

This slide highlights that the variability in lot sizes on this particular street so or in and in this immediate area.

So many of the lots are actually under the minimum required in the current zoning.

And this lot is no different.

So rezoning to the R1C zone would allow additional floor area to be added to the house.

The proposal can be supported because it is consistent with the official community plan land use designation that applies to this neighborhood.

It's a unique situation.

It's a small 391 square meter lot in a neighborhood of medium-sized lots.

And due to part of the lot being incorporated in the Galloping Goose right-of-way, additional floor area potential was lost as a result of that.

There are no streetscape impacts as the enclosure is within the building footprint.

Parking will meet the zoning bylaw requirements.

And if the property was to be completely redeveloped in the long term, a new building on the site would not be out of scale with the adjacent properties because the building height and setback requirements of the proposed zones are the same as the adjacent properties.

So this concludes the presentation, and the recommendation is uh to receive and staff are supportive of this application.

Thank you, Lindsay.

Question Rogers?

Uh thank you uh staff just a question the um the intended use is for home office that that has that has uh that is what the applicant indicated yes okay could so this could be a home business it could be yes okay uh how about a secondary suite uh the property does not meet the minimum size requirements to allow a secondary suite thank you any other questions from council no okay thank you, Steph.

So we need a motion to receive the report, I suppose.

Second.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

And then we go.

I believe that the applicant or the applicant's consultant is there.

They would need to uh mute their live feed if they're watching on the live feed and press star six to unmute themselves and join the call if they wish to provide any comments.

So for the applicant, if you would like to provide comments, you need to mute your live feed, apparently, and then press star six to unmute yourself in terms of being able to speak into the meeting.

The applicant had previously indicated that they would be available to answer any questions that council has, although they they did not indicate that they had a presentation to make this evening.

Well, that's good to know.

Thank you.

So does anyone have any questions of the applicant?

No.

Okay.

And so then we will go straight to comments from the public.

So are there any members of the public staff that we know are wishing to speak?

I have none on the chat feature, your worship producer.

Are there any on the calls?

Currently, there is one caller.

Uh last four digits are 3787.

So caller with the last four digits of 3787.

This is your opportunity to speak if you would like to.

So if you're on the live feed, you do need to mute that and then you need to press star six to unmute yourself on the telephone to give you access into our meeting.

Your worship, it looks like that caller has left the meeting.

Thank you very much.

So I'm gonna presume there's no, I'm gonna give one more opportunity for people to call in if they would like to.

So if you I have to find if you if you did want to call, you're going to call 778-402-9227.

That's 778-402-9227.

And then when prompted, you're going to enter 698-462-682 Pound.

That's 698-462-682 Pound.

So we're going to give say 60 seconds just in case there's any callers there who would like to phone in.

Your worship, we do have another caller.

Last four digits, zero zero four, seven.

So we have a caller with the last four digits of zero zero four seven.

So if you'd like to speak with us, we need you to, if you're watching on the live feed, we need you to mute that and then press star six on your telephone, and that'll unmute you and give you access to the meeting.

So three seven eight seven, go ahead, please, and give us your name and address first.

Does it look like caller 3787 is still there, staff?

Your worship, that's 0047.

Oh, 0047.

I'm sorry.

So caller with the last four digits, 0047.

If you would like to speak to us, you need to mute your live stream if you are watching the live stream and then press star six to unmute yourself.

I I do have someone who indicated they're unable to get in to speak, and I've asked that they type their comment here, and I could read that comment aloud to council.

So I don't know if it is the same caller or not.

So caller 0047, we are ready to hear from you.

You do need to press star six to unmute yourself.

And you're also welcome to send in a comment or a question through the chat feature if you like, and staff will relay that to us.

Uh Mayor Screech, it looks like that caller has left.

Uh, we don't know if that's the one that uh Sarah was referring to.

Okay, thank you.

Well, nobody wants to speak to us.

So I think we'll we'll close off the public participation component of the public hearing.

Um thank you.

I just ran the call, but so councillor Rogers has moved receipt of the correspondence.

Councillor Matson has seconded second receipt.

Second with the mic.

All in favor, opposed.

That's carried.

And now we just need a motion to terminate.

Smooth.

Okay, thank you.

So if there's people, if there's viewers at home that were tuned in for the public hearing and you'd like to wait for the council meeting, that is coming right up.

So just bear with us and we'll commence this council meeting.

So we're gonna call the council meeting to order.

Um again, there's there's some instructions for the public should they public participation comes up very quickly in this meeting.

So if you would like to phone in for that, you best to start that process fairly soon, I think.

So you're going to be calling in the same number that we just did for the public hearing if you want to speak under public participation, and that is 778-402-9227.

And it is, of course, on the website and on the agenda as as well.

And then once you get to that number, you're going to enter the conference ID of 698 462 682 Pound.

And then we will guide you through the process through there.

So public participation when we get there is the opportunity to speak to anything on the agenda tonight.

It's important to note that it's not an opportunity to speak about Eagle's Nest.

There's no public participation on that matter because we have had a public hearing.

Um, so council cannot take any more new information on that.

And there is also the chat feature.

Um, if you're looking at the live webcast, you can look at the QA icon at the top right-hand corner of the screen, and you can send in comments or questions through to staff.

So I'm gonna call the meeting to order at 7:19.

And I need a motion to approve the agenda, please.

So moved.

Second.

So that's moved by councillor Lemon, seconded by Councillor Kowalowich.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried, and then we have minutes of the public hearing on June 16th and the council meeting on June 16th.

Thank you.

Move adoption.

Second.

So that's did you have your mics on for that, just out of curiosity?

Okay.

So that's moved by Councillor Mattson, seconded by Councillor Rogers.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

So mayor's report, I just want to state the obvious that we're doing this is the first time that we're ever doing a live streaming in View Royal, and it's happened for a number of reasons.

COVID 19 certainly being the prime one, but we were heading that way anyways, and and COVID 19 has hurried up the process.

So it's important to the public in that you can now directly call in, which you have not been able to do since March.

So it brings us back as close to normal, I think, as we can get in these times.

And we'll be conducting the meetings like this, I think, for the foreseeable future.

So I hope people will get used to calling in and using that feature for the public participation.

A lot of municipalities have separate IT departments who would manage this sort of thing.

And ViewWorld does not have that.

Basically, the IT is done off the corner of our finance department's desk.

And they have they and Sarah Jones have worked really hard to get this set up and working, and they've done it in pretty record time so that we could try doing this tonight.

So thank you to staff for that.

And with that, we go straight to public participation.

So I will ask staff if there are any callers.

Currently there are no callers in the queue, your worship.

Okay.

So we'll give, you know, if public, if you would like to speak to any matter on the agenda tonight, we'll give just a couple of minutes for you to call in or to send something in through the chat feature.

So again, the number is 778 402 9227, and then the conference ID is 698 462 682-POUND.

So we'll give you a couple of minutes just in case there's anyone at home that would like to phone in about a matter on the agenda.

So, I'm gonna presume that there's no public participation tonight, and there is a question period later, which will be the same process to go through.

And um, I will ask again if there's any questions at that point.

So with that, we are gonna go straight to 8.1a, which is the ministerial order, and there is a staff's recommendation there.

Move staff's recommendation.

Okay, good.

So staff's recommendation was moved by councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Mattson.

There are any questions for staff?

Are we all good?

Okay, good.

So all in favor, opposed, that's carried.

Next on our agenda is the soil permit application for number seven and number nine, Erskine Lane.

Staff, were you going to speak to this?

I can speak to this, your worship.

Uh and I do have a PowerPoint if you would like to see it.

Yes, it's getting nodding of heads.

Okay, great.

Okay.

All right.

So this is um council, some of council may recall this application from a uh few years ago.

Um a soil removal permit was granted, however that permit has uh subsequently expired, which uh brings the applicant uh back before council this evening with a very similar application.

So this is uh a soil permit removal application to remove 2250 cubic meters of contaminated soil originating from the former boat repair yard at Seven Erskine Lane.

It a soil removal permit is required when there is no development permit or building permit already issued, and independent site remediation has been approved by the province.

A permit was previously issued on this site in 2018.

Next slide highlights the extent of the uh contaminated soil areas, and you will also note that the contamination has migrated to 9 Erskine Lane, which means that that soil also needs to be removed.

The contaminated soil will be taken off site via truck from Erskine on to Watkisss, onto Helmkin, onto the Trans Canada Highway, and then up to up slightly north of the Malahat.

The bylaw requires that the bylaw has a variety of requirements around this removal, including uh things like the provision of a security deposit, um, reporting uh at the end of the uh project, uh, and repair to uh any damaged facilities, et cetera.

The recommendation from staff is that this permit be approved in and that there are a number of conditions included in that particular re uh permit.

Uh and that uh also involves uh receiving a security deposit to ensure compliance with the conditions of the permit.

And that ends the slideshow.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director Chase.

Other questions for staff?

Councillor Rogers.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

I I I do vaguely remember the uh uh this coming before us uh before, but I I have questions now.

The um I do we have any idea how many trucks will be coming on and off of Erskine Lane to remove the uh uh soil material?

I do not.

I believe that the applicant's consultant is on uh uh is here at the meeting and may be able to speak to that particular question.

Hi, yes, um if you can hear me.

Um I would say somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred trucks.

Plus or minus, depending on the size of the truck and trailer.

Thank you for that.

Uh will there be any um um safety uh individuals on you know the trucks turning on and off of Watkiss Way into Erskine Lane?

Yeah, the contractor would be um responsible for providing uh a flag person or or more, whatever is required.

Uh another question, if I may, your worship.

Um so will there be notice to residents uh because it is a narrow lane and the might uh I'm sure they'll have some concerns about pedestrian safety.

Yeah, I would think um typically with this type type of job, the contractor will um uh will spread flyers around to the neighbors and uh put them in their mailboxes and make sure they're aware um at least a week before.

Uh one last question, your worship.

Um, the uh I'm I'm a little concerned about uh stormy weather, rain uh wash off uh and maybe in the in the process as the contaminated soils are um are being removed.

And you know, if we do get a deluge um and that stormwater does carry the um uh contaminants off site, uh could either go into Craigflower Creek or into stormwater at the portage inlet.

Um what's uh monitoring uh requirements are there from the province to um uh test if pollutants had escaped and uh to the aquatic life and how we do we address that?

Well, there will be uh so during excavation there will be tanks on site uh and there will be pumps placed at the lowest point of the excavation.

So that water will be if if it does uh fill the excavation and it's there it's threatening to to seep out of it, then it will be pumped through a tank and before that water is discharged it'll be tested um if worst case scenario is is that the water is contaminated and then we would bring in some treatment facilities for that so will our you know in the worst case scenario do uh other resources to test um um for pollutants say in the portage inlet uh well we wouldn't let it uh get that part we wouldn't let water leave the site that's that's the plan so before any work starts um we'd make sure that the contractor has a plan in place for um the foreseeable storm so you know something like a 25 year event and this work would be conducted during dry the dry season thank you for your help counselor matsen yes uh i was wondering under whose juris so i was wondering under whose jurisdiction uh or what legislation that will be fought has to be followed in terms of this whole process is it uh I'm assuming it's not just the towns but there's provincial legislation and and it whoever's it is how is that being monitored to ensure that they're actually following the guidelines director chase did you hear counselor matsen's question I did yes this falls under the auspices of the I believe it's the Ministry of Environment.

So this is part of the the contaminated sites regulations and it it is under their jurisdiction.

So my question do they also need some sort of permits from them?

They have already filed and had approved an intermediate and independent site remediation plan.

So they they need to follow that the plan that they have filed with the province.

Okay thank you.

And then I believe the province has the final sign off as well don't they?

I mean it's until the province signs off that it's all done to satisfaction.

They would not be able to have any building permits for that site yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Councillor Kowalowicz.

Maybe a question for staff or potentially the applicant.

I noted that the soil has contaminated the adjacent address.

I'm just wondering how that's going to be dealt with or what that looks like going forward.

Sorry, I can I can answer that.

Um that part of the remediation plan involves uh excavating on the neighboring site on Nine Erskine Lane.

And um so there will be two certificates of compliance issued, one for each site.

Okay, thanks.

Okay, there's no other questions.

So there is a staff recommendation there.

No staff recommendations.

Second.

Okay, so it's moved by Councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Kualowicz.

All in favor?

Opposed.

That's carried.

Thank you, staff and applicant.

Next, we have item C, which is the tax sale deferral.

And staff's recommendation is that we just receive this for information.

So moved.

Second receipt is moved by Councillor Kualowicz, seconded by Councillor Matson.

Comments, questions, thoughts, Councillor Rogers?

Yes, just so just for clarification, uh, we're um satisfied that we'll staff will simply proceed with process, ordinary the ordinary process.

Yeah, okay.

Okay, I'm gonna call the question.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

And next we have an update on the View Royal Park Plan from the Director of Development Services.

Thank you, your worship.

So I am pleased to advise council that we are preparing to move forward and resume some of our regularly scheduled planning activities in the town.

Having a pop-up open house in the park would allow us to maintain our physical distancing and would also ensure both community and staff safety for those who wish to come to the park and have a chat with staff or the consultant team.

And that will be happening this Thursday, July the 9th from 3 until 7 p.m.

And we will be set up in the park with uh with various socially distant or physically distant stations and are looking forward to hearing from folks about this project and then bringing back um what we hope will be a final version of the draft uh plan for council consideration later in the year.

Um counts Councillor Lemmon question.

Um yes, to staff.

Thank you.

Um I think this is great.

I'm just wondering, Will uh you you said at various social socially distant stations.

Um so will that mean there will be a member of staff in the dog park and one in the community garden and one in the the workout area, or will we, you know, will will you actually be kind of gathered together and presenting?

We'll be gathered somewhat together and presenting.

We have nine display boards in total, and we'll be uh spacing them out to allow um uh uh interaction with with individuals and small groups um that still uh facilitate uh maintaining two-meter distance between people.

So do you have an idea where you'll be located, or are you going to be on the move?

Uh probably fairly close to the parking lot, would be my guess.

Um on on the on the on the main pathway in and out that allows us to.

A couple questions.

First, in terms of the timing, somewhere I read in here that from three to five it's the opera on that day.

Is that is that correct?

The Pacific Opera will be making a flyby in the park on that day, yes.

Okay, so I thought that was three to five, and and somewhere else I read that this actually was five to seven in some sort of information that I received from the town.

I think the parks planning is three till seven.

That's correct.

And and Pacific Opera is going to show up sometime between three and five.

Okay.

The other sort of my my concern is uh the you're talking about the interaction, and I just don't know, you know, first off, during this time of COVID, why we need any sort of interaction.

And so I'm thinking that this whole process should be delayed until it's more safe.

Um, also given our financial situation and the loss of revenue from the casino, I don't think we have a lot of money to spend on some capital projects, which which is certainly would be.

So I'm just wondering why we need to do this at all.

And are we just putting people at risk for no good reason when it'd be better to do this a year from now when we actually have vaccines and it's safe.

Staff I can let staff answer that.

I don't think we're putting people at great risk.

I mean, you know, we've heard pretty regularly that the risk if you're outdoors and you're you're properly spaced is pretty infinitesimal.

And the plan the plan does need to be completed.

But at any rate, Lindsay, do you want to answer Councillor Matson's question?

Those were the exact reasons why why we are bringing this forward and moving ahead with community engagement work.

Um and we did deem that the risk uh by being outdoors was quite quite small.

So um for those who do not wish to participate by coming to the park, they can certainly participate by uh submitting email comments um to staff, and we will great gladly receive those as well.

And I guess ultimately it'll be our decision when it comes back to us whether we think there has been enough participation and input um before anything's adopted.

But I think it's good for people to see the the town is still working and the staff still doing things and and there's a way to engage.

So I think it's a positive I agree with you on the finances but that's kind of a separate question.

Did you have another question?

Well, is it questioning Yeah go ahead no go ahead if you want.

You know, I still don't understand why that it's necessary to.

I know the risk may be minimal, but there's still a risk in doing this.

And you know, we're supposed to wear masks in in restaurants and it's uh, you know, when you go shopping, etc.

And now you have people coming up talking to our staff.

Some people will be aggravated because they won't like some of the things in here.

They they could be, you know, whether or not they have a mask when they're talking to these to the individuals.

Uh just so process-wise, I'm just not gonna be able to support this on that basis that I don't think I just think it's premature.

Okay, Councillor Rogers, do you have a question?

Uh yes, please.

Um you know, I I kind of feel a little bit like um um Councillor Matson and and but I'm sure that the staff are gonna take every precautions uh both for for themselves and and for the public.

Um part of my other concern is that it's it um it's gonna be interesting to see and we'll see how much uh public turns out and and what comments there are.

We may um um based on on staff feedback um uh maybe want to consider having a Zoom meeting um on an informal uh basis um and as another opportunity uh for people that might be hesitant as uh as what counselor mattson is saying, maybe hesitant uh to show up and and um and you know do we have a a time period uh uh of uh when we uh will be getting feedback on the draft uh updated plan?

The plan has already been posted on the town's website for three months.

Um and uh at this point in time we have received less than a handful of comments.

Um so from that perspective, it it seems like something that we would be able to conclude this year.

Um I am hoping to receive um comments from the public by July the 16th, um, although obviously we can't extend that deadline.

And I am still working on um setting up a uh setting up something with the Parks Rec and Environment Advisory Committee so that they can also provide provide comments if they choose not to do so uh by participating in in the in the open house.

Okay, I I get you wish it by I have to admit I was not aware that the uh the update of parts plan was available for three months so uh well it did already come to us at a meeting back in february yeah it just escaped me but um okay so let's see how that goes and the deadline is july sixteenth councillor lemmon um yeah just to comment not a question i i think that um i think it's an ideal time if specific offer is going to be coming by i think that might be a draw and people might actually be more interested in um i it it's opportune for them to come across our staff and check it out so we might get more people um interested than we normally would and um I think staff and the public are well apprised of the COVID situation, and we'll take all precautions.

Anyone else?

Are you good?

So for me, I I really applaud it.

I I think I have a completely opposite opinion from Councillor Madsen, which isn't unusual.

Um, but I I think it's wonderful.

I think it's great for people to see us out and about.

The town is is still working, it's safe, it's outdoors.

I think having Pacific Opera there coming and doing a pop-up is a nice touch.

People are bored, they want to be out, they want to be doing things.

Um, and it can be done in a way that I think everybody's safety will be protected.

And I'm almost positive that Dr.

Henry would approve of it.

But I can't ask her.

Um, so at any rate, there's a motion just to receive the report for information.

Okay, so move by councillor Rogers.

Second, seconded by Councillor Kualowicz.

So all in favor of just receiving the report.

Only that that's the only way I can make my opposition to what we're doing.

Fair enough.

So Councillor Mattson would like his negative vote recorded for receipt of the report.

So again, we've already sort of discussed Pacific Opera.

Um, so there's just also a motion to receive that report for information.

So moved.

Thank you.

Second.

So moved by Councillor Rogers.

Seconded by Councillor Kwalowich.

It's just fun.

And again, I think that's a great idea.

And we in my neighborhood the other night we had theater scam come and park in a driveway.

And there was about probably 30 people that showed up and watched the 20-minute production on the back of a pickup truck.

And it was fun.

And this is the same sort of thing.

So I think it's great for the community.

So thank you.

So all in favor?

That's carried.

So next, we have our draft annual report for the year ended December 31st, 2019.

And I believe the camera is going to shift to RCAO.

Thank you for bringing that to my attention.

And Kim is going to present the report.

Kim.

Yes, the annual report is on today's agenda to be received by council.

Our intention is to invite the general public to make comments.

The intention is to click comment over the next two weeks and tweak the report as required, and council will be asked to approve it after that comment period is concluded.

Council is also invited to provide comment on the report, preferably by email, and presumably we'll get uh the comments on a timely basis.

And uh, if the report is amended, council will get a copy of the revised report for consideration near the end of the month.

At this point, we need a resolution to receive the report.

Okay.

So moved by counselor Matson.

Seconded by someone second it, Councilor Kowalowa.

Right, go ahead, Councilor Matson.

Yes, I'd like to point to page 14.

And my colleagues have a look at that medicine, please do pictures of your dog.

So, congratulations to staff on getting a picture of Councillor Mattson's dog in the annual report.

Councillor Rogers.

And that makes up for uh the other photo of uh council that did not have Councillor Matson on the image.

Oh, is there one?

So uh we would maybe want to put the dog in for that one.

And uh just just a uh a question to staff.

Um I believe that we had the shoreline ramp opening in 2019, the grand opening at Shoreline School.

So I'm not sure if that uh that was noted in in the uh parks department.

So that might be an achievement we want to note.

We'll make sure it's included.

And if you have other comments or or additions to make, please send us an email.

Right.

Okay, so that goes for anyone.

If there's things that you feel should be in there, just send them in.

And thank you to staff.

It's always a it's a lot of work to put that together every year, and um it's a lot of time.

Okay, so we need a motion to receive.

Was that was moved and seconded?

So all in favor, opposed, that's carried.

So we're going on to other reports.

So we have um first is the West Shore Parks and Rec minutes.

Move receipt.

Thank you.

Second.

Actually, I think on all of these, do we could just receive A, B, and C.

So you okay with that, Councillor Matten?

So Councillor Matson moved receipt of A, B, and C and Councilor Kualowich seconded.

Any comments, questions?

No.

Okay.

All in favor?

Opposed, that's carried.

And so then we have correspondence for action.

And we have letter A, which is the from the Victoria Electric Vehicle Association.

I would um move that we send the a letter of the province encouraging regulations as uh pointed out in the staff's um uh suggestion, and that we also refer the uh it to staff to provide a staff report regarding the infrastructure requirements in the zoning bylaw.

Okay, conduct okay.

Okay, everyone's good with that okay all in favor opposed that's carried and next we have the letter from mayor helps and i just want to give the um a little not really a caution here but i but the province is watching the councils that do support these motions and they are looking at land within those municipalities and there's an expectation that if we're to support this that we will be comfortable with rezoning to allow that sort of housing.

So it's not receipt quite as ignorant quite as receipt.

Well yeah so I we could do that I I do think it's a good idea to to do her the request number two passing a motion requesting the federal government match provincial funding.

I think we could do that but maybe on the the the the issue of of land we might just want to receive.

So counselor matzon's moved receipt is there a seconder I'll second.

Okay so seconded by councillor Lemmon did you have a question counselor rogers or comment.

Yeah, uh, I did notice, and and I worship I do agree with you it um um I I feel that I need to learn a lot more about the module housing and the implications for the town.

And um you know it's one of those instances where I would dearly love to have a staff report, and uh like I say, with the implications.

Uh I do note that um Mayor Helps is offering to give a presentation.

Yeah, I I don't, yeah.

Um the the the the expression modular housing is not really accurate.

I mean the one that's an example is the one being built on the corner of Hillside in Blanchard, um, where the old Blanchard courts, the townhouses were that burnt down.

And then so there's quite a it's it's actually quite a good looking building, but it is kind of a prefab building, and that's that's the sort of thing they're looking for, and that's gonna house 26 First Nations women.

Um just a comment at UBCM I went to a modular basically it's a modular uh modular housing presentation as an apartment block with uh about 60 people they put it together in about three months and they just basically put these yeah things one on top of each other and then put them all together so yeah and it didn't you know to be honest it certainly didn't look it look looked fine but at this point in time I'm more concerned less concerned about the modular housing than the province doing us more favors and putting in housing that we can't tax anymore.

Yeah.

Okay, so there's a motion on the floors for receipt.

So we could pass that, and then maybe we should pass a separate motion to request the federal government to match the provincial funding.

Okay.

So I'll call the question on receipt.

And then if someone would like to just make the follow-up motion.

I move that we pass uh move that we request the federal government to match the provincial funds for module housing units.

Okay, okay.

Second seconded by Councillor Kualowich, moved by Councillor Rogers.

All in favor, opposed.

That's that's carried.

And lastly, on correspondence, we have um a letter from Inspector Preston.

Move receipt.

Thank you.

So can receipt is moved by Councillor Lemmon, seconded by Councillor Rogers.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Yes, uh, just a quick comment here.

It was um timely to receive this, and I was uh particularly interested in and the work they're doing on on uh drug trafficking issues, the visibility of the police, and and working to uh reduce property crimes.

It all sounds very timely.

Right.

Everybody good, yes, Councillor Matson.

Yeah, I was just wondering um, given we're f following this sort of presentation and we have a large room with no one in it.

I'm just wondering if there'd be an opportunity, say, to invite the inspector down to do a presentation since we haven't actually seen him or heard from him in a number of months.

Yeah, Kim's nodding his head, and I think that certainly makes sense as we get more into the swing of things that we could.

Yeah, yeah.

So maybe we can do that for he's away on vacation now for a couple of weeks.

Okay, I'm gonna call the question number seat.

But yeah.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

So next we have bylaws.

So we have 10A.

Um, and just before we start, I just Lindsay, I guess my question's probably for you because I noticed this is for third reading and adoption.

So are all the covenants and everything in place that needed to be in place if this were to be adopted?

Thank you, your worship.

Yes, they are okay.

Thank you.

So, council, what is your pleasure?

I'll move third reading and adoption.

Second.

Okay.

I guess I can start with the mouses of people in the audience.

So who would like to speak to it?

So here we're uh so I just have a number of uh about five or six points here just to make, and I'll just sort of put them in sort of bullet form rather than talk for hours.

Um one of the things in terms of the the way this thing has been changed over a period of time, I think it's uh quite attractive and it'd be very nice entrance to that area of town.

I think it'll be a benefit in that aspect.

Um also provide economic stimulus for the the 300 plus families there, uh, to all the local businesses and um maybe even to the rural food mart that might might might help them out a bit too, as well as all the businesses in the shopping centers.

So I think that's an aspect that needs to be considered, or that I have considered.

Um, also having a building going in like that.

I've always wondered what's gonna what will it take to actually get things moving on that strip on Helmican that we want to see, you know, doctor's office, etc.

So I think it's also a catalyst, it could be a catalyst for that.

So large numbers of people there, maybe doctors will think it's worthwhile building right there because we have lots of people to go.

Uh, also, just given that it's housing that we always talk about needing more housing for people, and this is will have a tendency to be affordable given uh and you know, for families as well as individuals, and it's in a perfect location close to the hospital, close to transportation, uh, close to the shopping, and they probably the biggest issue i've heard our biggest complaint is the impact on traffic but as we've heard from staff we already have something that's already full of pretty much traffic wise then the additional traffic that will be added from this complex even if it's sort of at the worst case scenario is insignificant to the total traffic that's going through that through Hamilton.

So for all those reasons I will be supporting my motion.

Okay thank you counselor Matson Counselor Rogers yes thank you um certainly I've uh thought long and hard about the project and and weighed all the information from the staff reports, the materials supplied uh by the applicant, and the many pieces of the correspondence from residents and business owners.

I've heard and carefully considered the comments from all of Ural residents, especially those in the immediate area and Senates as well.

I appreciate everyone for taking the time and the effort to provide their thoughts, suggestions, and concerns since day one.

This is a very significant project with its social, environmental, and economic considerations.

And certainly these are not uh in normal times.

And uh many of us have seen the um um the real problems with the the global pandemic uh in terms of um job losses, tourism losses, and and uh even you know, of great concern, uh, the casino losses.

Um, and quite frankly, I don't believe that uh 2021 is good will be any better.

Staff have advised that this and future developments will be vital for keeping the town operational and sustainable.

And it is interesting, they've also advised that the development community is is facing strains of uh financial support and finding sufficient tradespeople.

So um I don't see we're gonna get a lot of those.

Um I feel that um the applicant um at the very beginning um when this the project had come before us, I certainly did not support the initial proposal.

I thought it was um uh need a dramatic improvement.

And I feel now, though, that after 10 community meetings, uh the applicant has done a great job in addressing the concerns of hidden oaks with respect to height, setbacks, tree protection, tree protection, and aesthetic values.

Four stories are reasonable when combined with the average setback of 16.4 meters.

The access off Burnside is much better than off Helmcken.

The density enables the underground parking, generous setbacks, and a very innovative design.

And I can't help but feel that this would be better than a three-story townhouse complex with no underground parking and a four-meter and just four-meter setbacks.

I think the forest would would be the loss on that.

Addition to the rural lands in Sandage.

I fought for the urban containment boundary years ago, and I'm really proud of this town's purchase and preservation of the three and a half acres of farmland off Little Road.

This project is consistent with the RGS regional growth strategy to stop urban sprawl.

And in terms of building heights, the Eagles Nest is considerably shorter or less height than the two apartment buildings in Eagle Creek.

Six stories is defensible.

Unlike Roskin Lane, this is already on disturbed land, and the important mature tree canopy will be protected.

I commend staff and applicant for working together in resolving the issues and making this a project that the town could be proud of.

I concur with the comments of staff and the reasoned and ration support.

The FSR is less than the maximum.

It meets the spirit of the OCP and the Gateway Corridor.

There are no variances.

It exceeds the community's OCP provisions and policy with respect to climate action.

I feel that there's no better location for walkability, transit, trails, cycling parks, YMCA, shopping services, and the hospital.

And I'm really impressed with 252 bike spaces.

The electric charging vehicle stations is uh addresses the needs that we've had earlier before in the council meeting, and transit passes is an is a terrific incentive.

View Royal signed on to the climate action emergency strategy, and this project is consistent with those principles.

In my 22 odd years on council, our aging residents have constantly told me I want to age in place, downsize, and live in View Royal with low maintenance, senior accessible units, and walkable services.

I think we have a future home for them.

I realize now, however, that the division of a gateway corridor may only be viable for this site and maybe two other corners.

The seven rental homes on Helmican are landlocked with no uh reasonable uh density and traffic access onto um uh Helmican.

Um, and other than off of Cranarden, that'll be another problem.

I doubt the Ministry of Highways will give consent to similar densities either at the Helmican market or the Chancellor Triangle.

I suspect that the pressure on Chancellor Watkins' light would be likely too close too much for the Helmican overpass uh to satisfy the ministry's concerns.

In terms of traffic, I do agree with staff.

Congestion is from the western communities in even Western View Royal.

Uh we've uh we've you know we've seen that the Eagles Nest is is superior because it has great good reasons for walkability and great incentives to leave the car at home.

This cannot be said for Thetis Lake, where unfortunately uh there's not walkable services, and congestion will only get worse on Six Mile Road.

And I certainly do not like the idea of letting development revenue be just available for Langford and Culwood.

In our 2020 budget, we approved staff's recommendation to spend $85,000 to fix the sidewalks and improve the uh sidewalks along Hidden Oaks.

And as the staff report then noted, uh Eagles Nest would uh complete these important improvements all the way to the town boundary, and this would be free.

This also would provide a bus pullout to reduce congestion and a fantastic welcoming corner feature.

And quite frankly, I feel there's no need to wait for McKenzie Interchange.

Since the public hearing on June 16th, it has moved at lightning speed.

The club relief to the university has now been paved, and I'm sure that that loop will be ready by the end of July.

I feel this development is consistent, if not even better, in comparison with many other approved developments that we've seen in the past four or five years with View Royal.

Similar FSR, density and height, and a much better in terms of the setbacks, no variances, tree protection, full underground parking, a central courtyard with uh on-site amenities, and a highly commendable climate action incentive program.

The Holmican streetscape offers a really pleasing ambience, and the corner is remarkable.

I think the applicant has addressed the building heights with a strep design that we, as council, really liked at 242 Island Highway.

Lastly, I think this is about ensuring a healthy and very density mix for the area.

We are awash in current and future apartment units.

I gathered that the Eagle Creek apartments are still having vacancies, and the neighborhood already has two townhouse complexes, and there's only one other condo building across the street.

The proposed number of units provides much needed customers for the shops and services at the Eagle Creek Shopping Centre.

For these reasons, I support the project and will vote in favor of the bylaw.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Rogers.

Councillor Kualovich.

Thank you.

I was waiting patiently.

Lots of good points by Councillor Rogers and Matson.

I won't be uh as long, but I I do want to mention a couple key points that um will contribute to me voting in favor of this bylaw.

I want to commend the applicant on the extensive community consultation.

Uh it's fair to say that they went above and beyond uh a typical uh rezoning application for this, and uh they've set an example for uh future uh for future applicants coming forward to our council.

I think my biggest selling um point here, other than the Woo Nerf, which uh which will be great to have in View Royal, is the is the location.

It's uh it's on a it's very close proximity to uh to a highway very close proximity to the Galloping Goose.

There's uh bus routes the project has made itself as green as as possible with all sorts of um bicycle uh parking spots and uh it's it's going to be the um the kick start in my opinion for us to revitalize that corridor and uh I'm excited to support it.

Thank you, Councillor Kowalovich.

Councillor Lemon.

Well, now for something completely different um this this uh this this application has been weighty for me and and I've been it's been agonizing in many ways.

I've studied and restudied the applicant's proposal, and I've been paying very close attention to resident input.

And I appreciate that the applicant has addressed so many concerns, and there are elements of the proposal that I really like, like as my colleague said, the woonerf.

And and I and I like the the aspect of the uh front doors of the first floor apartments access into the street.

Um I'm disappointed in general, and this is and this is not entirely um within the control of the applicant and I and I get that, but I I do want for the record, I'm disappointed in general that there's not been more space reserved at that intersection corner for future traffic considerations.

But I think if we're building a community and infrastructure for well into the future, having a stop and go light at um Burnside and Helmkin is going to be very limiting down the road.

And once this project is developed, um we're going to be stuck with that.

Um so I've I've spent, as I said, a few days re-examining the proposal.

And and uh what one thing, and the proponent um devotes time and space in his presentations to the financial contributions project would bring to Bureau, and I think that's valid, but I I have to say I don't I don't think we for this council and for this town, um the uh dollar contributions are what we're about um and not a prime consideration.

We we don't um it's not what we stand for, and and a development of this size doesn't come without cost um and impact on our community and the and the infrastructure.

We've received dozens of emails and letters from residents who are concerned about density and the traffic impact.

And uh colleagues at this table will recall that not so long ago, Bureau Royal Council had a mantra that was residents first, not developers first, but those who call Bureau Royal home and will be the most impacted by projects first.

I'm attentive to our residents, and while we did receive correspondence in support of the project, for the most part, the 247 units won't be built in their backyard.

So I'm not entirely sold on the benefits of this project to View Royal, and for that reason, because surrounding residents said clearly they don't want it.

I won't be voting for it.

Third reading.

Thank you, Councillor.

Thank you, Councillor Lemmon.

So I guess for me, I'm relieved to know I'm not going to be the tying tiebreaker, which um makes makes my job a little bit easier.

I do have a few things to say.

I I agree with Councillor Lemmon on the revenue.

I I don't get this idea that we're going to support a rezoning for revenue.

I think it's a fool's game personally.

Um, and I don't think that's why you support new development.

I mean, any piece of research will show you that residential development actually costs the jurisdiction money in the long run with the increased demand for services.

So I admit it it lessens the tax burden.

But I think to be talking about the casino and bringing that into the picture is just not right.

I think if you're going to be supporting a project, you support it because it's good for our community.

And I think a whole lot of our residents would be quite happy with paying a bit more taxes rather than see a project they didn't want.

I also need to comment a little bit on the public process.

I was really disappointed to see the people in Hidden Oaks cast as NIMBY's.

And frankly, they were cast that way by the developer.

And I didn't appreciate that.

I didn't think it was fair.

I also didn't like to see Viewer residents that, from all appearances, were contracted to lobby on the proponent's behalf from other sides of the town.

I believe that the people that live closest to it are the most important, and that's why there's provincial legislation.

You know, that actually in the provincial legislation for public hearing is only the people within a hundred meters are supposed to be notified.

Viewer all does 400 meters, but it's definitely the people who live nearby to me that have the most say.

I'm really torn about it.

I walked in tonight and thinking I could still vote either way.

Um, and I still feel like that right now.

There's a lot of good things about the project.

I know that that site is worthy of higher density.

Part of me still thinks it's just a little bit too big, but in fairness, I don't really understand what would make me feel more comfortable with it, whether it'd be 1.4 FSR or what it would be.

But some part of me does feel that it's too big.

But we're we're all told that smart growth entails putting lots of residential units close to services, close to transit, close to the highways, and and this ticks all the boxes on that.

The traffic problems, I think, you know, I mean, I I always say that if we say no to development here, Langford just approves 500 more units, and we get all that traffic, anyways.

So you could argue that for traffic problems, we actually need to be approving more density closer to the core and closer to alternative methods of transportation.

So I get the concerns about the traffic, and I live right there, so I I understand them.

So I'm very torn, and and I must admit I'm partially torn because I'm worried, and and I mean, no offense, but I really want this to be a quality project.

And so I'm really hoping that I won't be disappointed and that this will be a top quality, top notch project for V Royal.

So that is a challenge to the to the developer and to the proponent because clearly it's going to be approved tonight, and I and I hope it'll work out that way.

And I think with that, I am going to vote in favor.

I'm I'm still very torn.

Almost part of me feels like I should vote with Councillor Lemon and take the easy way out, but I won't.

So with that, I'm going to call the question.

All in favor?

Opposed.

So councillor Lemon is opposed.

So that's third and fourth reading.

And thank you to all the public who wrote in and spoke to us at the public hearing.

We do we understand all the concerns that you that you raised, and um we shall take it from there.

So thanks everyone.

So next I can't get into my agenda.

Oh, it's the Chantanums.

So next we have third reading of bylaw number 1053.

I'll move third.

Thank you.

Second.

Okay, questions, comments?

Everybody's good.

Okay, all in favor.

That's carried.

Um and councillor Mattson, your handy dart is coming back again.

Yeah, this this may be a little late, but what I wanted to do was contact uh BC Transit to see if it would be less costly to just simply give a subsidy to individuals to take taxis or to the various locations to eligible for eligible individual eligible individuals, then for VC Transit to get spend millions of dollars to desecrate, desecrate a potential View Royal Park and to pay for, you know, the reality is you know, pretty costly service.

HandyDART is a fairly expensive service, not for the individuals, but for the uh those who pay for the buses.

So that's all I wanted to do is just ask them for some sort of cost comparison.

So I might hopefully not feel nearly as aggravated as I do now about what they're doing to the people of View Royal.

Well, so maybe what you want to do is invite them to come and give you a brief presentation on that.

Right?

To come and explain to council rather than us making a well, I don't know what you want to do, but that that okay, but the my okay, then I'll just change it slightly and I'll just move that we invite them to come and tell us about the the costing of this versus versus contracting out essentially.

Contracting out to the taxes, a subs providing a subsidy.

Okay.

They're a seconder?

Second.

Okay.

Comments.

My only comment is they haven't paid attention to us to date.

Um, but let's try, sure.

Well, I don't think this is being done under the guise of trying to stop the facility so much as to Councillor Matson to get some peace of mind that this is the most cost effective way to deliver the service, right?

So just to get some information on the costing, but it actually costs for the service and et cetera.

Counselor Rogers?

I do understand that um uh they do transit does provide taxi scripts for for folks.

So yeah, it would be helpful to get a better understanding of that versus uh Handy Darton and uh you know the the merits of of both and why they choose what they do.

Yep, no, I'm sure they'd be happy to um do a telephone presentation or something staff can work on that.

And I was happy to be able to use the word desecrate our parks in this discussion.

Counselor thank you your worship I uh I am fully in agreement with questioning the merits of the uh administrative process for handy dart uh and that that is a legitimate comment because if you remember when they were here I I I think we all learned something when I was questioning a representative from BC Transit, and they're actually the handy dart is run by a third party uh we learned that, Dave, you recall that.

It's it's contracted out to uh to a company who runs the handy dart if you if you do recall that.

And I know there's some contrarian views uh via electronic mail about uh the the merits of the administrative structure of the whole handy dart process.

I think it's it's a done deal already, nothing's gonna change, but uh I I fully support um you know looking deeper into it uh for I guess for for peace of mind at this point.

Okay, so I can recall the question all in favor, opposed, that's carried.

So lastly, to our viewers at home, um we have question periods.

So again, we'll give you a couple of minutes here, but you can go on the website and and you'll soon see there how to call in.

You can also use the chat feature, obviously, for questions.

It's a good use of it, but then once again, you want to dial 778-402-9227.

That's 778-402-927.

And then enter meeting ID number 698 462-682 Pound.

That's 698-462-682 Pound.

And so if you have any questions, and the questions can be on anything at all, really.

You have two minutes of which to ask a question.

And so please go ahead and phone in, and we will we'll just pause for a couple of minutes to give you a chance to do that.

Your worship, the chat feature has been open uh since uh some t sometime in the I believe the report section, and uh they have there have been no questions at this point.

Producer, have there been any phone calls?

Uh there have been no phone calls thank you okay so we'll just allow another say 30 seconds just in case people are are busy trying to call in Okay, well, thank you, Public.

And so with that if if I may, your worship, yes, there appears to now be a caller.

Last four digits, six, eight, five, one.

So we have a caller with the last four digits of six eight five one.

If you're watching on the live feed, we would ask that you you mute that and then you press star six, which will give you access to us here in council chambers.

So mute your live feed and then press star six to unmute your telephone.

Hello.

Hello, yes, we can hear you.

Can we get your name and address, please?

Hi, this is Sean.

Um from 1035 Nikini Place.

Um first time caller, longtime fan.

Um just calling to let you know that uh the call session is working.

Excellent.

Well, thank you for calling in.

Did you watch the live stream of the meeting just out of curiosity?

I did.

I actually thought I'd ask.

I don't know how to spell desecrate, so I'd be curious to hear what the spelling is of that word.

You obviously were paying attention.

So everything worked well in your opinion.

Yeah, yeah.

From this end everything's been great.

Thank you.

Okay.

No, thank you for calling in.

Okay.

I think I can.

Thanks.

Are there any other callers?

I don't believe there are producer, are there?

Uh negative.

Okay, and there are no there are no additional uh questions that came in on the chat feature.

I will now close that.

And I I believe I could be wrong and could be corrected by a producer, but I believe that might have been Sean who was involved in helping staff set up this project.

So oh okay, I wondered.

Yeah.

Good, good.

Um good.

I'll move adjournment then.

Okay, thank you.

And the good work, staff.

I mean that all was um yeah, relatively painless.

Thank you.

So good work and thanks everyone, and we'll see you in two weeks.