Public Hearing

Good evening, View Royal.

I'd like to call the public hearing for Tuesday, October 17, 2023, to order.

And that we recognize that Lekwungen speaking people known today as the Esquimalt Nation and the Songhees Nation and their historic connections to these lands to this day.

Your input via the public hearing process is important to council in making a decision regarding the amendment to the proposed covenant.

And I think on the agenda is a traffic light or a roundabout.

If you're here for off-leash dog walks, I think you're in the wrong municipality.

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

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

This evening we will hear a presentation from staff, and then we will hear from the public uh during the comments for the public portion uh public uh uh portion of the agenda.

At any time, if you wish to provide comments by telephone, you can call 778-402-9227 and when prompted, enter conference ID 919 937 77 pound.

At the appropriate time, I will announce the last four digits of your phone number, ask you to mute the live cast to avoid feedback, and ask you not to use your speaker phone to ensure sound quality.

I will then ask you to unmute by yourself by pressing star six.

To begin, please indicate the name and address for the record, and then you may give us the benefit of your views.

If you are providing comments through the chat feature, which is available during the public portion of the public hearing, that feature will open following the staff presentation for your comments.

Again, we ask you to provide your name and address to begin your comments.

Members of council, if they say so wish, uh, can ask questions of you.

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

That is you.

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

That will that topic is on the agenda on the following council meeting.

During the course of the public hearing, people sometimes tend to become too enthusiastic or emotional.

Regardless of how you favor or oppose any particular application or argument.

Please keep your phone on mute so that everyone may hear the person who has the floor.

And if you're in the room, just be cognizant that not everybody may share your same views.

After the public hearing, or sorry, like all public hearings, this meeting will be recorded to aid in accuracy of minute taking.

By participating in the webcast, you are consenting to being recorded, and the recording will be available on the town's website for future access.

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

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

This part is really formal.

On the informal part, I would say that thank you for showing up and thank you for benefiting us with your views.

It's difficult sometimes to get up in front of a mic, especially if you're not used to public speaking.

So take your time.

To hear your views because you showing up tonight and informing us is significant in itself.

So I will now ask for an approval of the agenda, including the late items.

Can I get a motion to approve?

Second.

Moved by Councillor Brown and seconded by Councillor Lemon.

All in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

Steph, I'm just wondering, Councillor Matson, is he online?

He is somewhere.

Maybe his camera's off.

And I think I might have done that out of order because I just did a statement of public hearing, didn't I, Sarah?

So I just am I okay to continue?

Yes, and then the senior planner now has his part.

Yep.

Over to you, Chuck.

Thank you, Your Worship, Jeff Chow, Senior Planner.

October 5th, the notice that advertised public hearing was posted on the notes board at the municipal office and posted on the town website as well.

On uh October 5th, uh 458 notices were mailed to residents within a 400-meter radius of the site.

And finally, the notice was advertised in two consecutive issues of the Times columnists on Wednesday, October 11th and Thursday, October 12th.

Obviously, the message got out because we've got quite a few uh folks in the house.

Thank you, Jeff.

Uh I'd like to move to reports and over to you, staff, for uh item 41A on request to amend the covenant for Erskine Lane Walkers way around about.

Thank you, Mary Tobias, Evan Leoung, Director of Engineering.

Uh, this presentation is a brief summary of the staff report.

So I'll probably take a few minutes to go over, and then um I do have kind of a larger blowout of the um proposed design and happy to answer questions afterwards.

So the purpose of this uh of this public hearing is to summarize a proposal to amend the covenant to construct a signalized intersection instead of a roundabout at the intersection of Erskine Lane and Watkiss Way.

This was this project was rezoned back in 2020 to permanent 336 unit apartment that is currently now under construction.

The covenant was registered in conjunction with rezoning to secure a number of community amenity contributions, one of them being the roundabout.

Or two with respect to the roundabout, the conversations that staff have had with council and action items that have followed.

So at the May 2nd, 2023 council meeting, staff did present the fact that the roundabout may need to be revised because of spatial challenges fitting within the road right of way.

At the time it was stated that there was going to be encroachments onto private property, privacy issues with removal of numerous vegetation, and then there were design concessions.

So there was an informal path that actually would have still encroached on private property.

There's pedestrian accessibility challenges with the removal of a sidewalk or a crosswalk, and then obviously, removal of the trees.

And at that meeting, it was proposed to um change the roundabout design to an oval, and that was done with the applicant's transportation engineer.

Uh the purpose of having a more narrow or uh skewed roundabout was to save space and to allow for um no encroachments along the private property side on Stoneridge Drive.

That seems to be the those two properties are the one that are most impacted by the roundabout.

So the idea was to shift the roundabout as much as it could while also narrowing a portion of it while also start trying to um accommodate emergency services, uh moving trucks and um and buses and transit, and also allowing for four legs of uh crosswalk on all four ends, and um while also allowing full turning movement of this uh property on the southeast corner.

Um at the last at that council meeting, there was some discussions about uh pedestrian flashing beacons, and uh what staff provided for commentary was that the design would be done so that uh those flashing beacons could be put in the future should they be warranted.

So we're now fast forwarding to the September 12th, 2023 community of the whole meeting, at which time uh further detailed design was done on the roundabout, including a geotechnical design and uh survey and a grading plan.

And based on those findings, it was deemed that there was still going to be encroachment of private property, and as you can see here on in this figure up here, there's even though it shows that it's a small little corner, it's actually quite a bit more substantial.

And the reason why I say that is because there's still uh retaining walls that would be required, and usually they have a batter that also slopes down.

So, quite in fact, there would be quite a bit of encroachment in the private property, and it could not be uh mitigated.

And the reason why I say that is because we look down on this, uh, these extra excerpts in the bottom here, by shifting the crosswalk further towards the roundabout, we're actually um exacerbating safety for pedestrians and vehicles.

There's less uh refuge area here, is actually not recommended at all for roundabout designs.

So, based on that, on those two items, uh staff had to work with the applicant on what other options there were with the roundabout and what alternatives should a roundabout be absolutely beyond a reasonable doubt unable to be done.

So, with staff, the applicant went through probably around almost a dozen iterations of where the roundabout can be located.

So one of them was the obvious one of well, why don't we shift the roundabout further towards Erskine Lane?

And that would exacerb or alleviate the retaining wall and privacy encroachment issues on Stoneridge Drive.

The issue there is that there is impacts to the driveway at 22 Erskine.

Basically, it is too close to the roundabout, and that would exacerbate their turning ability.

Basically, they wouldn't not be able to do a left turn out.

Vehicles that go in and out there would have to go to the end of Erskine Lane, do a U-turn and come back out.

And then also there is uh if you can if you notice here in the corner right of 22, there's a lot of vegetation there.

That would all be removed as a result.

Um staff did hear from residents and from the corner uh business that's uh those that greening green area is important.

It's where uh their um the daycare of the children they they play.

And as much as as a transportation engineer, I don't want to see kids playing around in the intersection.

We had to take it to heart.

So though that was the primary one of the reasons why uh this option was not feasible.

There's another option of moving it to the northeast a little more.

Um, it would require uh additional road land dedication from uh the applicant's land, which is uh in the big scheme of things, not a big deal.

But what was a big deal was the fact that it would uh exacerbate land acquisition on um the northwest corner on Stormridge Drive.

There is there was an option uh that was discussed about well, why don't we just move the roundabout further into the uh Ninerskin land?

Um the issue there is that by moving it further away there, um, it could work, however, it would prevent vehicles from making a right turn in a Stone Ridge drive.

The geometry is too acute of a turn, and as a result of that, most traffic would actually go down the other side of Stone Ridge.

Um, as you may know, it's a very narrow road in there, and um to have the volumes going through those narrow roads would uh affect um the neighborhood.

And then finally, I think this is the last example we had.

Uh, the example being shifting the roundabout further south uh along Walkers Way.

Um, doing that would alleviate the uh land issues on the northwest, but it does introduce more issues on the southeast and southwest corners.

Again, it'd be a removal of the um the existing retaining walls, installation of new retaining walls on private property that would require property acquisition.

And given the design sacrifices of pedestrian accessibility, transit, and ability for the neighborhood to access through the Stone Ridge and Erskine neighborhood, it was deemed that additional alternatives needed to be considered.

So per the traffic impact assessment, a signalized intersection could still accommodate the above knowledge transportation values.

Um it is noted historically that uh roundabout does better for traffic calming.

Um however, there are things that can be incorporated into a signalized intersection to help promote the values of a roundabout, to uh reduce speeds, to promote traffic calming, and to uh provide better accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists, and transit users.

And that's done by basically increasing what they say the friction to the roadway.

So it could be um having visual cues, whether it be median, signage, curving, um, narrowing of the roadway, changing the road alignment.

All of these can be done to help uh traffic calm the roadway on Watkiss Way, which has historically been fairly straight.

So, what we have, I do have a blow-up of this um this figure here in the next slide.

Uh, but generally speaking, this would be what the signalized intersection would look like.

Um changing a road alignment on Watkiss Way, so there is a little more SKUs because of the turning lanes that are required for uh Waukus Way.

Um there would be improvement to active travelers.

So should uh council wish to pursue this, uh staff recommend undergoing the design requirements of the active transportation network plan that was just adopted in the spring of this year.

So that would include 1.8 mile wide meter sidewalks, uh one and a half to two-meter wide boulevard furnishing zone to create separate sidewalks, uh, and then a protected bike lane complete with um a whether it be a physical or a buffer zone.

Um there's an example here that's been been used from time to time throughout Greater Victoria.

And these all can be incorporated to not only keep things safe for active travelers, but these are design elements can also create friction in the roadway, promote traffic calming.

So this is a blow-up of the of the diagram.

And at the end, if you want me to go back to this to this figure, I'd be more than happy to do so.

There is a median proposed here on the south end to help provide visual cue.

As you can see in this kind of the purple line here, that is the buffer bike lane.

There's pavement markings that would extend throughout the intersection to provide a better visual cue and intersection for cyclists.

And ultimately, there is in this drawing a four ways for pedestrians to cross the street.

So this is a lot of numbers here.

I'll try to be brief on this.

I think it's very important to understand what this table shows before I go there.

Just because going by a north or it's and going by eastbound, westbound, northbound, southbound, it could be difficult to read what's considered eastbound or northbound, or that.

So I've included that in this in this figure here.

When it comes to intersection design, we look at a few things, but the main thing is level service, which takes in the corporation predominantly the delay of vehicles and a 95th percentile queue.

So that is how long a queue would be for when the light is red.

The one thing to note here is that the difference between a traffic signal and a roundabout is not that much if any for the Stone Ridge and the Erskine Lane legs they're both level service A and then one thing to maybe look at here is the um plus 3.3 plus seven plus four and plus 3.2 this is what this means is that this is the additional of delay or an additional queue that you'd see during peak hour where there's peak AM hour or peak PM hour.

And based on staff's review and back and forth the transportation engineer, uh, the applicant's transportation engineer uh staff is in agreement with these numbers.

The one thing that does change with respect to uh signalized intersection, uh, I have them on bold here.

So these are the eastbound and westbound legs.

And these would be the through traffic along Watkiss Way.

And because of the traffic signals there and the fact that uh we do have between 4,500 to 8,000 vehicles uh going through Watkiss Way.

There is a little bit more of a time delay in queue, but in the big scheme of things, with the level service of B and 37 meters is maybe six or seven vehicles.

Um, staff is staff believe that to be um quite amenable.

So, in conclusion, staff supports the proposal as the works would not require additional land requisition from the nearby properties.

Uh, in addition, staff recommend additional design measures to be implemented, including uh signal timing priority uh that could be done with uh current uh signals of the day.

Uh leading pedestrian signal timing to improve prioritization of pedestrians.

So, what leading pedestrian signal timing is is that uh when the light turns before the light turns green for vehicles, there is a certain delay in which uh the pedestrian signals are actually a go.

So before vehicles can go, they'll understand that there's still uh pedestrians in the middle of the road crossing, gives them a little more time.

Uh BC transits review of the transit stop.

So we will uh staff and the applicant will continue to review the transit stop locations and work with them to find out an optimal location.

And then finally, the installation of some active transportation related safety features I've I've uh explained before, crosswalks, protective bike lanes, cough complaint, landscape medians, and those items that kind of provide a visual cue.

And the recommendation is that the covenant be modified, establishing a signalized intersection to be constructed instead of a roundabout, and that the modified covenant um be uh revised.

So that concludes my presentation.

Happy to take questions from you, Mayor Tobias.

Thank you, Ivan.

Uh good report.

Um, just going to questions, of course, we're not going to be debating or uh issuing this to the council, but does anybody have any questions for Ivan?

We'll go to Councillor Brown first, please.

Yeah, just a quick one.

Uh, thank you for the report.

The concrete uh barriers for the bikes uh that's at the intersection.

So, how how long would those be?

I'm just wondering because the only reason I ask is I know in Victoria when they have them, they've had some problems recently with all the leaves and the pine uh lee uh uh stuff stuff coming down on the uh slippery, it's a hazard.

And I noticed they got a mini road sweeper that goes down there.

So um would that be our responsibility to get something like that in addition to to keep that clean because it it is a safety hazard?

Uh yeah, Mayor Spyas, that's a very good question.

So um for long stretches that you see in other municipalities, they do have sweepers that do that are able to sweep long stretches, and staff have looked into that and taken that into consideration, especially back when uh staff did the active transportation network plan.

Um, at this time, what's uh what has been asked for is a very short run basically constrained within the intersection.

And the reason why is because uh intersections are where the more conflict points are, and if it is needed to do some traffic calming and to improve uh safety and uh accessibility for active transportation users, it would probably start with just constraining to the intersection.

So if I was to go by this drawing here, it would probably be this section here uh along the northbound approach and the same distance for the southbound approach here.

Uh pretty much on both legs here.

So I I wouldn't say I would say that maybe max 20 meters or so.

Um, in addition to that, as you may as you can see here in this median, uh, what we are cognizant of is um accessibility for emergency services.

So if there's a median here and if there is a concrete barrier at the same time, um staff would want to consult with uh Chief Hearst with respect to what works best for him as well.

Again, uh and then when it comes to maintenance, so uh staff engaged with our own public works leg.

And uh for such a short leg like this, that can be done without machinery.

It could be done with our with the existing um boulevard crews that are actually in walk is way quite often.

I think it's a quarterly or seasonal when they're there to uh maintain the boulevards, especially on the on the west side of the road, and they could easily um take care of the the sweeping on those in those uh protected bike lanes.

Thank you, Councillor Brown.

Councillor Lemon ivan i've i have a question i will strive to not sound like a comment uh this in in prior to your your arrival here and uh previous councils um have twice had roundabouts come to us and they were going to work so has anything changed has anything changed structurally um that would that makes it less feasible now, less viable now than it was three years ago?

I got through the mayor.

So the biggest change is not the geometry itself.

The biggest change is the information provided at the time.

And so with respect to the roundabouts that are um designed these days that do take up a bit more space as a result of the need to um accept uh bigger vehicles.

Um there needs to be some sort of care when it comes to proving out the design.

And nine times out of ten, um, you know, the uh the concept provided before us uh before staff, generally with good staff uh good staff review uh works.

There are two, there are some things to consider though that may require more information, and that's what happened here.

So at detail design, when the applicant provided their survey of the land um as well as their detailed design, they actually take a look at um is actually a really good computer model they use to figure out what the slopes are based on the cross section.

And based on that uh in new information given, it was realized that um it wouldn't fit.

Um when I reviewed the the concepts before my time, it was going to be a tight squeeze just by putting pencil pen on paper.

Um, and that was just proven out with uh with detail design.

Just to follow up, um, the same traffic engineers are involved now as we're involved three years ago.

That is correct, yes.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Lemon, Councillor Rogers.

Oh, yes, thanks.

Thanks for the report.

Um, I think you've certainly addressed the uh the issues and the challenges that we all face on this movement trying to successfully tried anyway with the roundabout.

One of the huge benefits of the roundabout is that it's easy to do a left turn.

When I see this, um there there seems to be in the in the drawing here from Merstell Lane, there is no dedicated left and right turn lanes out.

And that worries me.

Um, because if we have that the full build out in 2033 of 55 cars turning left, 125 cars turning right at peak times, um, then those cars, if it's only one lane, those turning left, waiting for that signal, will be blocking those vehicles all the way down the hill.

In the summertime, that may not be too bad, but in the wintertime with ice and snow and those kind of conditions, I'm concerned that we have dedicated left and right lanes right out here.

Prince Robert Drive's going to have it.

Helmcken Road has it.

So for this one road out for 600 cars, theoretically, we should have, don't you agree?

And I guess that that would be part of the discussions.

Is it possible to revise this and ensure that uh the residents, uh future residents, 9, 10, 5, you know, 7, fourteen, that they're going to be able to successfully get out left and right with a minimal amount of waiting.

Yeah, thank you for the question, Mayor Tobias.

And I think um the person that may be best to answer that would be um the transportation engineer.

He's here and might be able to uh provide more details.

Mayor, council, my name is Andy Cating.

I'm a transportation engineer.

I work with Watt Consulting Group.

I've done the design on the roundabout and the traffic signal.

Uh to your question, Councillor Rogers, our analysis showed that a single lane should be able to handle the traffic.

If in the future it's deemed necessary, there is right-of-way available to move that lane over.

So it can be constructed in the future, but as we've known in our report, um, there's sufficient capacity to make that happen without the dedicated lane.

So it is possible to do this right off the bat without any worries or issues and uh and be proactive in this, right?

Because we do have the width.

Yes, we have the width.

Okay.

So we should be proactive and satisfy the issues that are coming towards for us and all those future residents on this lane.

It probably would be a good idea to anticipate this now while we're in the construction phase.

Our analysis took into account the full build out of Earthskin lane and all of the associated traffic on it.

Right.

And that was that analysis I'm referring to.

Right.

We showed you know I have high level of performance.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Um design questions.

Um I don't know if you or staff, um, will are these um is this in detection going to have loops to detect uh traffic that are waiting?

Um there's gonna be one of two methods.

Loops is the uh one traditional method that's been done of days of old.

There's as also another method which is uh basically sensors that are put on top of the traffic light, and those are found from time to time.

Regardless, there will be detector loops of some description.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

The design drawings that you show up on on the uh before us, it shows a sidewalk on the number nine side, uh, but um there doesn't appear to be a sidewalk on the opposite side, the west side of Erskine Lane.

Is that coming?

So for as a condition of the development, uh the applicant was generally supposed to um they're responsible for doing frontage works improvements in front of their uh their frontage, and the local government act basically says that they can go up to the halfway point and anything beyond um they're not required to.

However, there are some there are some conditions to that as well.

For example, if the if the roadway is um if it is modified in such a manner that it does require uh those assets to be put in place, then that can be done.

An example of that is in order for this intersection to be done, in order for this configuration to be uh done with uh safety in mind, um, the applicant would be required to do uh a good um chunk of the works that's south of intersection, which is beyond the frontage improvements.

As for the north here, uh I do think that there are some sidewalks there, but it stops at a certain point.

And so if there's no sidewalks there to begin with, then it would be required to install them.

I guess my memory uh is that of number ten number Erskine Lane, um, that there was a commitment from number 10 to put sidewalks on their side the uh the road is that correct all the way to uh Watkis Way uh yeah this is and uh Peter you probably might be able to speak to it.

Sorry.

So the mayor, I um yeah, I can confirm that Tannerskine Lane would be providing a sidewalk on the west side of Erskine Wayne, uh, all the way down to the uh end of the culprit sack to the uh galloping goose access.

Last question, if I may, you worship.

Okay, that's great.

Um, you know, one of the great benefits of um uh nullwood, you know, when you go around the island highway is that there are flashing lights telling people that there's a inner uh signalized intersection coming up.

Um, because of the curve that we see on Watchgus Way, is there some good setting or indications to drivers on Watchkiss Way that there's this intersection coming up?

Yeah, through the mayor, I understand what the question's about.

Uh when the sight lines are are uh inhibited.

There's usually there can be some advanced, it's almost like a highway amber's flashing light, but it's on the side.

Uh you see it from time to time.

It really depends on whether or not the sight lines are indeed exacerbated, and that we determined at the time of uh further detail design.

If I may, one last question.

We don't know the cost between um doing a roundabout and the cost of a um uh traffic light.

Um, would you say that they're comparable?

Yeah, thank you.

I I tried to get an estimate for this report, but um there's been two or three iterations and staff weren't satisfied with the cost estimates provided.

So it wasn't um it wasn't valuable.

I didn't want to provide anything to council that could be um, we don't want another roundabout issue.

Let's put it that way.

So um based on the back and forth and what staff have gotten to and some interpretations of the of the estimates, they can be somewhat comparable.

And the reason why I say that is because even the roundabout, while it used up a lot of square area within within um this intersection, uh this obviously the signalized intersection uses less space, but the the applicant would be required to install um this uh leg of roadway or do upgrades further down below the intersection, that kind of balances out to some degree.

But at this time, I don't know for sure what the actual number is.

It is fairly consistent in terms of like a 20-30%, but that's as far as I can go right now.

Thank you.

I'll check in with uh counselor Qualwich if he has any question.

Well, perhaps maybe even a point of order, but we'll won't we be rigorously debating this as well in the council meeting coming up.

I'll I'll hold my comments till that point.

That is correct.

Okay.

I wanted to make sure that um all the information was available to us.

Um because if I'm I'm worried that if we had a public hearing and something we're no longer in a public hearing and there was information I wanted from staff, I don't want to put them in a predicament of not being able to give us the information.

Thank you.

And thank you for counselors for um crafting some questions as or cut some comments as questions.

I'll go to you, counselor Matson, because I don't see on the screen and just uh a survival check plus to see if you've got any questions.

Yeah, no, I'm surviving the uh I I don't have any any questions.

I thought the staff did a really good report.

Uh I'm not happy with it, but it was quite a quite a good report.

So thank you.

Thank you, Counselor Matson.

And uh I've just got one question of my own, and it it uh comes from Counselor Rogers.

I know it's difficult to look at the cost without um the the finalized plans, but total cost of ownership and the cost of maintaining uh either option.

Uh obviously the it's expensive to redo lights, um, and it's expensive to consistently maintain uh a roundabout.

So are they uh equal or is one drastically more expensive because that comes out of operating budget?

And the same people here will be paying taxes on whatever choice we end up making anyway.

So having a sound input on uh on future costs of servicing would be good.

Yeah, America Bias, it's not drastic.

And um, in fact, I would say that's the biggest issue that staff had was with respect to the retaining wall design by Stone Ridge.

Um the additional retaining required would be feasible, notwithstanding the the land issues with it.

Um however, it did state that some monitoring would be required to make sure that the existing wall below us still uh was was uh showing signs of strength.

And so uh by not having to do that, that actually alleviates um some additional future costs, or what if you were to associate cost with risk, then yes.

Uh with respect to maintenance, yes, the um the maintenance of street lights is a little more regular in the sense that uh we need to make sure the lights work as opposed to whether or not the plants are working.

Um so uh but the thing is is that the landscaping is done quite often, so it may be less costly, but it's done more often.

And so by uh figuring those two out, it's it's not substantial.

Uh and that was one of the reasons why I wanted to create this uh make sure that the signal laser intersection that was done so that it was cost neutral in the big picture.

Thank you, Ivan.

And I see no more uh questions from council.

So I think that we've got a spot here for comments from municipal staff.

Was there any staff that wanted to make additional comments on it?

Or was that uh Ivan and Jeff's Wartz?

So I think we could probably move to comments from the public.

So we'll go to the room first.

Um I'd ask you just a refresher, activate the microphone.

When you press the button, you'll see a little red light show up, and it'll show up here on the top.

And um, we have not uh set a parameter for time, but um I as long as council uh supports me, and if I find you're at that point where you're repeating yourself, then we can go there.

Uh Sarah.

Uh the applicant may wish to make it.

Oh, you're right.

Yeah, let's go to the applicant next and then the public.

Thank you.

Uh Matthew Fitzgerald, uh 2036 Island Highway, South Calm River.

Uh sorry, I'm I'm the applicant uh for this amendment to the covenants.

Uh and I'm joined here by uh Terry Hoff, who's one of the owners of West Urban, uh Trevor Kirshner, uh who's the general manager of operations, and uh Andy uh Kading, who you you've already met here, who's the uh the traffic engineer uh responsible for design.

Uh we don't have any specific comments uh uh to make at this time, but we did want to offer um, I guess our our background and knowledge on on the uh the proposal.

And if council does have anything that you want to clarify or any questions you have, uh we're we're available uh here now or um at the end if if there's questions on uh any comments made by by the public.

Uh so leave it there.

And if if council does have questions at this time, uh we're happy to take them.

Um and we're we're here for for any other questions that come on uh later on.

Thank you.

Uh Council Rogers.

Hi, uh I understand that you had a public information session with the neighbors.

Uh can you tell us how that went?

Yeah, we uh thanks for the question.

Uh I guess through the mayor.

Uh we we had a uh public information uh open house uh on September 21st.

Uh it was held on the site, so there's a nice flat gravel area on the site where we're able to uh frame the uh uh remove uh move the the construction fences uh and and create a uh a space there where uh the public could gather uh so we had um uh boards there that displayed uh both the uh roundabout design as well as the proposed intersection design and then members of the Westurban team uh were there to answer any questions that the public had.

Um uh we over the uh the duration of the meeting we had uh approximately 50 people attend.

Um it's it's approximate because not everybody signed in but uh and then we did receive uh a couple comment cards or a few comment cards which were predominantly um uh in support of the intersection over the roundabout uh with one uh undetermined what we whether they supported or or are against it um but i think generally uh participating in the conversation uh with the um the members of the public on the site uh that night uh the general sentiment that we we as a team found was that uh the public and particularly the the neighbors surrounding the site wanted the intersection over the roundabout any other questions for the applicant counselor matsen any questions no questions.

Thank you, Councillor Matson.

And uh thank you for your offer to answer any more questions.

But I think before the public ask any questions, important that um we get ours out of the way.

So thank you.

Sarah, am I missing anything for direction?

We can move to uh first in the uh in the room.

Okay.

So I'd ask who's ever bravest um to uh take the microphone first if they wish to address council.

Um feel free uh to do that.

Um Chris Stewart, 22ers can lane.

Um so Mayor Tobias, Council.

Just want to say that we're very supportive of the proposed intersection.

Um obviously, the roundabout as designed would have a serious impact on us as has been described by uh staff here.

Um certainly we see the uh the intersection as a much safer solution for us as well.

Um having researched roundabouts a little bit more and uh it's been pointed out to us and I've observed it myself, they are not very controlled in that the intersections themselves, the crosswalks, are really at the the will of the people in the roundabout.

And as we've seen in Victoria, people don't know how to use roundabouts very well.

So as a family with small children and running a daycare, that is of serious concern to us.

So certainly we like the idea of lights and controlled crosswalks.

Um, also, of course, the um the damage to the vegetation around us, um, we would lose pretty well all the trees, excuse me, uh, along Watkis and in front of Erskine, which of course would be uh a real detriment to us uh and I think the neighborhood as well.

We've already seen enough uh tree loss as the development happened.

I know uh West Urban's proposed that they're gonna replace them all, and we're very happy with with what they've said they're gonna do.

But obviously, losing any further older growth trees, uh, if we can avoid it, would be certainly appreciated.

Um, and of course, the roundabout, as also been pointed out, for us to get out of our driveway would be almost impossible.

Uh so again, with that intersection there, I think that'll make it easy.

Um, and thank you, Councillor Rogers, for bringing it up.

I do also agree that if we had a right turn lane dedicated, certainly if the width supports it, um, doing it now as opposed to later, I think would be uh advantageous.

Um again, selfishly for us getting us out of our driveway.

If people are all backed up behind people trying to turn left at that light, we're gonna be stuck.

And of course, for our daycare parents trying to get in, that also could cause us some real grief.

And uh yeah, it's community service that we'd love to be able to continue providing.

Um beyond that, uh, I know we don't want to get into other issues.

I am also kind of opposed to that inter or the sidewalk on our side simply because again, we do this proposal, put it in an intersection, we preserve those trees, and then we put in a sidewalk.

I think it's gonna probably kill off some of those trees that we had just saved.

Um, so again, it's I don't know when that discussion around 10 happened or if it we have another opportunity to comment on that one, but I also know there's a lot of Gary Oaks down that side that would be impacted if we proceeded there.

Um, and also again for the traffic calming side, we would certainly support reducing the speed limit along Watkist to say 40 kilometers an hour.

Um, I think that would also help with the uh traffic calming.

Um yeah, I think that's about all I had.

Thank you.

I thank you for that.

Thank you very much.

So anybody else that would like to uh provide counsel the benefit of their opinion.

Um unit 2414 skin line.

Um originally when this uh complex was proposed, I was a great fan of the idea of a roundabout.

As time has progressed, and I see how some other smaller roundabouts function, even in View Royal.

And people don't use the roundabout, they go through it really and they hedge it on the side.

Um, I have come to believe that an intersection is a much preferable option here.

Um the two questions I have, which actually one of them I didn't think about before tonight was if there is a medium proposed on uh Watkus, the exit or the entrance into Game Road, because that's our fire entrance, would have to be assured in terms of wherever that median is put.

Um, and the second thing is um right turns on to Watkus of the Erskine in terms of the bike lanes.

Um that has presented some problems in other municipalities and and in ours, I think.

So I would like to make sure that right hand turns on right in at peak traffic times, and I know that the lights can be modified when the roundabout near the hospital went in there was huge backups uh along Watkiss Way in the morning and then of course it was adjusted and that problem has been eliminated almost totally in my view um so all of that I think is I anticipate will be managed by um technology but that issue of being able to right turn off a very small dead end street where there'll be a large number of people residing is important I think.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Anyone else like to address council?

Carol Kitsen, Unit 17 at 14 Erskine Lane.

I excuse me, I too at the beginning had thought, well roundabout was the great um answer, but and I think probably our um complex gave um West Durban that impetus to try it, but I too think that the traffic lights is a far better um answer here.

And yes, safer for people crossing the road.

Yeah, what whether the right turn happens or not, I just I think having the street lights is a far better option.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Is there any anybody else from the public?

Good evening.

Good evening, Claire McDougall, 291 View Oil Avenue.

Uh Council Rogers and Mayor Tobias, I appreciated your questions about the financial implications.

And on that note, and on the question about a dedicated left turn lane, right turn lane leaving Erskine.

I do wonder about, you know, if this comes to be if it was built with without a left turn lane, like what would be the there would need to be a plan for assessment.

And I wonder if the town would pay for that or whether there'd be a if it was needed, recognized to be needed in a certain amount of time, if the developer would then pay for that in two years or whenever.

I just I don't know how that works.

Um that's my comment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anybody else in the room that would like to provide their opinion for council?

Hello, uh Brent Howard, 206 Stone Ridge Place.

Thank you, Mayor Tobias and Council for the opportunity.

Uh installation versus a roundabout in this case.

My question is what are the thoughts of a flashing light rather than a green, yellow, red?

Like, say if we like first come, first go, like you come, you stop, you assess, um, possibly a flashing light rather than a than a green amber red.

And that's my only thing.

Uh, question about that is is that a potential idea?

And also I'm happy to hear less trees are are coming out because of their mature growth trees that are there with the owls still nesting in them and such.

So I'm glad that's no more trees going down.

So just wanted to add that.

And thank you.

Thank you very much.

Not seeing anybody speak for the roundabout yet.

Anyone else would like to address counsel?

Um can you speak a second time?

Just briefly.

Sorry, I just forgot to mention one thing.

Um I have been told by BC Hydro that the uh power pole on the corner, uh right outside our our um house is needing to be replaced.

I guess the increased voltage going down that street.

Um, again, with the uh the hope of saving those trees.

I was hoping that the the new power pole could be just moved to the other corner.

Um, as I've been told, all the other power poles along Erskine Lane are being moved across.

If that one could be moved across as well, uh my understanding is it would then save those trees as well.

Thank you.

Because I think if they have to replace that pole, we'll probably lose the trees anyways.

Thank you.

Going once, twice, three times for anybody else in the room.

Nobody else in the room.

So we'll go to folks next uh on the phone, Carl, and I'll speak slowly and wait for 40 seconds or whatever the delay is in the webcast.

Um do we have any callers waiting?

Mayor Thomas, we have a caller waiting, but we've had a few people post to the Q<unk>A chat system before that.

Would you like me to read those out first or give you the phone number?

Uh if you could provide the phone number, um, and we'll go to the folks on the phone first, Carl, and then do the chat um as the the final part.

Okay, our caller is uh last four digits, 7107.

So caller 7107, can I get you to ensure that your live webcast is muted and press star six um to unmute yourself and start by stating your name and address, please.

And I don't think there's any way I can unmute you.

So if you can't hear me and you have either offered your comment in chat, then we can get to that.

Was there another uh person on the phone, Carl?

Uh Mayor Tobias, we have no other callers at this time.

Um I could go to QA if you'd like.

Yes, please.

Hello.

Oh, hello.

I think we've got somebody now, uh Carl.

Uh can you start by saying that?

Sounds like a person on the phone.

Can you start by stating your name and address and then provide counsel with your opinion, please?

It's Doug Wilson, 291 View Royal Avenue.

Sorry, I had double-muted myself somehow.

Two comments.

One is um I'm concerned that without the knowledge of the difference in cost between uh between a roundabout and the signalized intersection as long along with the ongoing maintenance of the signalized intersection without knowing that the actual cost differences would would there's just not really the information to make a decision on this at this point.

I've note that the proponent seemed to be willing to build a um multi user uh bike lane down Erskine Way as a part of uh change to the covenant and uh and the town refused it.

So it seems to me like there's was some feeling that there was a differential in the cost.

The second comment is regarding turn lanes and the and the development of a completed intersection right from the start.

I I fullheartedly agree with the people that are saying that they have concerns that there's going to be a long lineup on Erskine because of uh inability to turn left in a in a practical manner.

If there's a chance that that is going to come true, the intersection should be built either fully capable of that at the developer's expense, or the covenant should be written in a manner that there's a review, and that the developer would have to fully remediate if it was found that there was need for additional traffic movement signals.

I think having taken the risk now and and uh that it it's not going to come true, and then finding out later and that and having to do the entire remediation at the expense of the town is unreasonable.

And uh that's about all I got to say.

Thanks.

Thank you, sir.

Is that uh all our callers on the phone, uh Carl?

Uh Mayor Tobias, that was our only caller.

Thank you.

You can move to uh chat.

How many chats do we have?

Mayor Tobias, we have uh looks like uh three chats at this point.

Um first one is from uh Jesse Edmonds, 1900 Watkiss Way.

Their comment is: have the traffic numbers presented taken into account the increase with the BC Transit Handy Dart Hub upcoming.

That's a good question.

I'm seeing nods, so I think that was part of the uh the future understanding.

So next question, Carl.

The next question is from David 102 Stoneridge.

Their comment is I thought I heard earlier that the proposed signalized intersection does provide in ground loops.

Does this include loops for the Erskine and Stone Ridge sides?

My question is focused on ensuring the resulting design provides all means to limit the amount of time cars are idling unnecessarily at the intersection.

Thanks, Carl.

I'm getting nods from Ivan and the uh transportation uh consultant that that is indeed the case.

Next question.

Um just queuing that up now.

The next question is mark is from Mark Kakovic 204 Stonerridge, and they say I fully support the signalized light for this intersection.

And they said there have been too many um tree, and then I think they got cut off when they were entering.

But I think possibly they mean there were too many trees removed, but that's just speculation.

Thank you, Carl.

Was that the end of the chats?

Uh Mayor Tobias, I'll need one moment just to check that.

Okay.

Take your time.

Um yes, that's that's uh that's all of the uh comments for now.

Thank you, Carl.

Much appreciated.

And I'd like to move to, I think that does it for the public participation.

We covered in-person phone and chat.

Um can I get a motion to receive um the correspondence, including the late items you'll find on your blue sheet, but where in effect, if you're looking online, they're included in the latest version of the agenda.

Okay.

Councilor Rogers moved, Councillor Brown seconds.

All in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries for uh receipt.

And can I get a motion to terminate the public hearing, please?

So moved.

Moved by Councillor Lemon, seconded by Councillor Rogers.

All in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed.

And I'm assuming your vote is in the affirmative in case I hear otherwise, Councilor Mattson.

Uh thank you all for coming out for the public hearing portion.

Um that ends the public hearing portion, and of course, that's uh brings us to the start of a council meeting.