Council Meeting

Good evening, everyone.

And we'll call the council meeting for Tuesday, April 19th to order at 6 59.

And I'd like to begin the meeting by recognizing our friends and neighbors, the Songhees and the Squamalt Nations.

And so for the public tonight, under there's what have we got here?

This so for the development.

Oh no.

Okay.

So for public participation, for anyone wanting to speak to any item on the agenda, you're going to dial 778-402-9227.

And when prompted, enter conference ID 134 001 013 Pound.

And that'll come up very quickly, public participation.

So if you are wishing to speak to any item on the agenda tonight, including the development permit on Atkins Road or any other matter, you should be getting on the phone now.

And at the appropriate time in the agenda I will ask you I will announce the last four digits of your phone number ask you to mute the live webcast to avoid feedback ask you to not use speakerphone to ensure sound quality and ask you unmute yourself by pressing star six if you can give us your name and address for the record please this meeting will be recorded by participating in this webcast you are consenting to being recorded and the recording will be available on the town's website for future access and with that if I can get a motion to approve the agenda, please.

So moved.

Second.

Moved by councillor Lemmon, seconded by councillor Mattson.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

We have the minutes of April the 5th.

Move adoption.

Second.

Thank you.

Comments, corrections?

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

I don't have anything under Mayor's report other than to welcome our new director of engineering and public works, Ivan Leung.

Welcome.

It's his first day on the job today, I gather, isn't it?

So we won't ask you any difficult questions tonight.

So moving right along, we have public participation.

So if there's anyone in the room or any callers on the line, this is now your opportunity.

Do we have any callers on the line, staff?

Your worship, we have no callers at this time.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anyone in the room who'd like to speak under public participation?

So we'll carry right on then to 8.1A, which is the development permit application for 221 Atkins Road.

I'll move staff recommendation.

Okay, thank you.

So the recommendation has been moved.

Is there a seconder?

A second for discussion.

Okay.

So we probably should let staff go through it.

I know we have the applicant on the line as well.

So staff?

Your worship, Jeff Chow, Senior Planner.

Um, just loading up the PowerPoint.

So the purpose of this uh application is to consider a environmental development permit to facilitate subdivision.

Uh this property, which is roughly 350 3,500 square meters, back's onto Millstream Creek and is you can see from the air photo is quite a bit of a sloping property that slopes down from the road down to the Millstream Creek.

There were landslides at the north end of the property in 1973 and 2002.

The slope was remated in 2003, and at that time a covenant was registered to require geotechnical certification for new construction, building alterations and additions.

The proposal is to uh subdivide the property into two, and because it's in the um natural uh shorelines uh uh water course and shorelines uh development permit area, um a development permit is required for um protection of the natural environment uh in this case the applicant has provided a number of studies including the geotechnical study a tree uh arborist report and most importantly a um a uh riparian areas report uh and based on that analysis they've identified uh a number of areas that are to be protected the first is the streamside protection and enhancement area which is shown there in the in the blue and that is the um that is the area that is uh most significant to protect in terms of maintaining the health of the uh the aquatic habitat at Millstream Creek.

Uh there's also uh a geotechnical um setback that's then has been established.

And in this case it's a little bit beyond the boundary of the uh of the SPEA, but uh those are the that's kind of the location where the closest that buildings can be to the uh the crust of the slope.

There's also a tree protection boundary because the number of trees being protected to be proposed.

And for the most part it's it's coincident with the uh with the geotechnical setback.

Uh the final boundary to consider is the are the zoning setbacks and in this case the most restrictive boundary is from the the front yard boundary uh in light blue in turquoise uh and that kind of based on all kind of four different aspects you end up with a a building envelope that is kind of um is in this shape but uh it's been assessed that they are buildable areas and uh if the property was subdivided then you would have um a viable building envelope uh considering all those four uh uh aspects uh the applicant proposes to retain part of the existing dwelling on the largest lot lot one in order to comply with um the zoning uh in terms of setbacks to the new lot line so part of that building would be would be removed and they would retain that.

And part of it is you know beyond the geotechnical setback a little bit, but uh uh it is existing.

In terms of the development permanent area guidelines, the two main things to consider are are um riparian areas uh regulations in this case because it's adjacent to uh freshwater and also geotechnical.

In terms of geotechnical, because uh a covenant's already in has is already in place as you require any new buildings and structures uh have geotechnical certification.

Uh in terms of meeting the riparian area regulations, um, it requires a number of things.

I won't go through everything, everything here, but the main things is that our harbor supervision is required.

Um fencing of the SPEA is required, and so there would be construction fencing while they all they built, and there would be some silk fencing as well to keep um erosion and sediment from entering the Millstream Creek, which is important fish habitat.

But it also requires that once it's complete, that there would be permanent fencing of it.

So either either it's like a stake type fence that will provide a delineation so that the property owner is reminded that that is a protected area.

Basically it means uh minimizing disruption to the natural kind of flows in the area.

When you build a structure with a with a perimeter drain and you put in driveways, it increases the runoff and decreases the amount of water that's absorbed into the slope.

And that's kind of important to keep the slope viable in terms of the vegetation and in terms of the stability of the soils.

So the challenge will be at the time of subdivision, the geotechnical engineer will have to look at ways to maintain the groundwater in the area, but also divert any uh additional flows uh likely down into the down into the creek.

So the uh repairing areas report allows for that in terms of um uh enabling stormwater piping uh to carry excess flows down to the millstream and would be done in such a way that the excavation work would be restored with native vegetation and there would be erosion controls at the bottom to make sure that there's no scouring where the water comes out of the pipe.

There would be post construction report by the environmental monitor, and they also recommend that the covenant be registered to preserve the SPEA in a natural state.

Typically, the town does not like entering into covenants because there are some obligations to monitor.

In this case, it is a SPEA, it isn't a development permit area.

The covenant serves to provide extra notice to the property owner, future purchasers to be aware that there are some uh natural features here to protect.

In terms of zoning, the proposal would comply with the lot size requirements of the R1 zone in terms of lot area and width.

One of the things that came up at the time of committee the whole was it became evident that part of the, for example, lot one and lot two, um, the underwater portions uh were included in in the lot area, and we've verified that um in some cases uh where there's crown land adjacent, um like the ocean or larger bodies of water or other sections of Millstream Creek, uh the uh the lot area um uh would be reduced uh to only the land area and the underwater portions would be returned to crown.

In this case uh the property line is to the center line of Millstream Creek.

Uh there is no adjacent uh crown line in this area so uh so millstream creek is essentially um part of the uh lot area for this property.

Uh in this case it's not significant because the building envelope is still uh way at the top of the hill um but in terms of uh for for zoning purposes the the two lots um include the land that's under the bed of the Millstream Creek.

So the recommendation is to uh approve the development permit um because it is in compliance with development formatory guidelines.

That development of the site is to be conducted in accordance with the Riparian Areas report prepared by Tim Adams Stantec Consulting, which includes a number of requirements.

And the key ones include registering a covenant to protect the SPIA, ensuring that the stormwater that's conveyed down slope is constructed and restored under the direction of both a qualified environmental environmental professional and geotechnical engineer, and the town's standard requirements that there be a standard uh security deposit for landscaping and protection of the natural environment to be determined by the QEP prior to commencing alteration of the land.

That's to ensure that disturbed areas are restored and that's no environmental damage.

That completes the report.

And the applicant is here in case there's any questions from council.

Thank you, Jeff.

Questions for council?

Council Rogers.

Yes, I thank you very much for the report and um uh the professional um documents uh attached.

Um the uh the qualified engineering professional um uh they've they've obviously got some work in terms of the uh security deposit for uh protection of the natural environment, uh silt runoff and the um storm drains and and sediment erosion control.

Um they've they this individual provides the plans, but who does the um actual um in ongoing controls during construction uh through you your worship yeah through you your worship um there is an environmental monitor so usually it would be a qualified environmental professional like a registered professional biologist uh just the way these uh the way the work goes is that this report um is is being adopted and incorporated into the development permit because there's not necessarily an assurance that the person who prepared this report is going to be the one um doing the monitoring work.

But that's why that's why it's worded in such a way so that there will be environmental monitoring.

Okay.

Okay, good.

So the the the QEP does the um uh guidelines to the determining the factors and someone else monitors.

Okay.

Um I'm I'm a little concerned it does when it suggests that the stormwater isn't going to go into the ditch, because uh and there is portions of the report, page 16, that suggests that stormwater should go into the ditch because it's got settlement properties, but I gather the town uh doesn't permit that.

So the the stormwater is going into pipe and then flowing directly into millstream.

How do we ensure that the the quality of that water, that stormwater, from hard surface driveways, oils, and so forth isn't going to damage the uh the stream?

Um through you, your worship.

The uh the on site stormwater management, that is a requirement that that the flows and the quality of water kind of meets meets the uh meets the provincial water guidelines.

Uh the ditch itself is uh meant to carry water from the road and through the subdivision process uh would provide further assessment on whether that's really suitable for this this site.

Likely it's not because it's a little bit higher than where the the building foundations would be, and water usually runs downhill.

Um but uh but as it is, it is a soil, and then part of swales um uh to my understanding, um not being a biologist, but swales, uh the vegetation in swales provides some filtering and sediment control and and uh water quality kind of enhancement if they're vegetated.

So if I may um your worship, uh just just for point of clarity staff, so you're suggesting that there would be uh some kind of uh swale or settlement pond that would um uh capture and filter the stormwater before it goes into the stream?

Uh through your worship, uh no, I think the in the what the report is saying is there's an existing situation where there is a ditch uh alongs along the road.

Um and and if they were to direct water in, then that would be something to consider as part of the subdivision stage, uh surfacing stage.

Thank you.

Uh I noticed in your report uh you mentioned that uh there's gonna be proposed tree replanting on on the ravine slope.

Um is there um a um a landscape plan uh where that replanting will occur?

Uh through your worship, uh what we have received is um I would have to look in the plans where they provide a replanting plan.

Uh but uh that might be something that if trees are being removed, they would be under the current bylaw and there would have to be, you know, uh they have to be replanted in a you know in a suitable location.

Um and that's something that that would be managed through the tree permit process.

Yes, because I did notice on um photo four, uh, that's on page 22 of the 27 report, um, it showed um uh considerable clearing of the lot.

And I know maybe the property owner can help me with this, but I'm just wondering if that's an area where um the uh Arborist is re recommending replanting so i guess the the applicant maybe when we get there can speak to that have you have you finished your questions for staff one more if i may um i also read that um uh you know maybe we can get some clarification on this but it seems like there's a benefit to the community with um uh some property owners m maybe more than just uh the site um having the advantage of of sewer as opposed to aging septics how many properties will benefit from uh that new line along um atkins road uh through your worship uh it'll be about a dozen uh the the properties on my road place are connected to sewer so it would only be those from essentially from that myra place intersection to the uh to the the city limits at at the municipal boundary with City of Langford yeah that's about a dozen properties great things would have to pay to hook up to a yes but it's uh yeah this helps spread yeah any questions on my left uh I have no questions uh I okay I think it's well covered thank you so there was one question there for the applicant possibly just about the tree planting that maybe you could answer.

You are muted uh yes, just uh to confirm it was page 22 of the 27.

Yes.

Yes, photo three is at the uh bottom of the bank.

Uh as uh Mr.

Chow's noted, the uh if that's being brought up.

That's in the SPEA area.

So um any replanting that occurs in that area has to be under the direction of the biologist.

So um obviously there's a lot of room uh in that area for planting, and and it does tend to uh actually provide additional stability to the slope uh when uh vegetation is introduced and and uh planted, uh the roots bind up the slope generally.

So um depending on the biologist's recommendation, yes, that area uh could be done, uh could be planted.

Mm-hmm.

Okay.

And so I guess you know when it comes back, staff can give us some idea of how many trees are gonna be replanted.

That would be hard to do.

Sure, although I don't think this is gonna come back, right?

Once we've approved it.

But but staff could certainly report out.

This is the last opportunity for council.

So I'll ask another question when you're ready to worship.

Okay, go ahead.

Thank you.

So um uh clearly, and um the arborist is saying that the trees on on um Atkins Road are in poor health and and uh should come down.

Um would those trees uh be the option for the arborist um in terms of the number of trees that could be replanted on uh Photo three.

Is that the idea?

Is that for staff or is that for me?

Sure.

Uh I just know that you know the the staff report talks about a proposed tree replanting on the ravine slope, and uh so it seems that staff would have some idea of what uh what trees are going to be replanted where.

Your w your worship uh at at this at this point, this is an application for a development permit.

Right.

The the details of tree removal, et cetera, are are still yet to be determined, and any tree removal would be subject to the town's new tree protection bylaw.

Right.

So exactly.

Right.

Another question, and my last question worship to the applicant.

Sorry, your driveway.

Do you um plan to have a hard surface or permeable surface for the uh two properties?

Uh still to be determined.

Uh so that wasn't something that we'd uh dealt with extensively as uh the planner noted.

Uh the uh runoff conditions are going to need to uh you know mimic as closely as possible the existing conditions without affecting the slope, so that may affect the choice of driveway surfacing.

Yes, thank you.

Yeah, okay.

It'll be up to the geotech engineer.

Effectively, yes.

Okay, thank you, staff.

Thank you, applicant.

Everybody else is good.

I'm gonna call the question then.

All in favor, opposed, so that's carried.

Thank you.

We have all the committee of the whole resolutions, which we could probably just move the three as a block.

Is that so moved?

Moved by councillor Rogers.

Second, seconded by Councillor Kwalowich.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

And then we have correspondence.

So I guess A and C we should do those together.

We just have that report.

Which staff are already working on, right?

So would just question your worship with these um uh comments and suggestions um concerns uh by the two letter writers, would that be part of the overall discussion that we can have when the Step Code comes back to us?

Yeah, I think that's exactly the plan.

Yeah.

Depending on staff's discussions with neighboring jurisdictions, etc.

When it comes back.

Yeah.

I I'd be particularly in the one question here, what what barriers there are for implementing um the low carbon um systems.

Um you know, what if we can discuss those barriers and how we can resolve them?

I think that would be very useful.

Yeah personally I'm sure that'd be covered.

I think we should just wait for staff's report to come back.

Yeah.

Okay so then we've got a motion to receive A and C.

So move.

Okay.

All in favor opposed that's carried and then we have B which move receipt.

Okay.

Thank you.

Just speaking to that your worship um um I I appreciate the the letter writer um uh expressing the concerns um I guess the the critical thing as long as um those using the uh roundabouts are doing so in a uh safe manner of um uh yielding where they should and uh entering the the roundabout in a slow respectful speed um but in terms of the the curbs uh we've already noted that they had been uh hard edged and we actually some years ago turned them into soft edges because uh vehicles were damaging uh their their tires and blowouts and so forth.

Yeah.

Okay so counselor rogers moved receipt is there a seconder for that okay okay counselor matsen go ahead yeah wasn't the whole point of her her letter the fact we've made it too easy for for people who want to just zip over top without going around like regular people to do and and and that she's asking that we increase the sort of back to where it was because if buses can go around it, then some guy or or gal in a vehicle who wants to speed through and over.

Uh if they lose their tires because they're breaking the law and not following.

I mean, I don't have a problem with that.

I do have a concern that uh we're potentially putting people's the pedestrians at risk as people are speeding through that uh speeding through and over the traffic circles.

Well, I I agree I could ask staff a rhetorical question of how many complaints we've had about this in the last five years.

That's okay.

I don't really need an answer, but I think the answer is none.

So I think we should monitor the situation.

And um, as Councillor Rogers rightly noted, we did spend a whole lot of money on making those curves mountable because of the number of complaints we have when they first went in from people damaging their wheels and tires and buses and things that couldn't get around the roundabouts.

And I don't know that we've had any other complaints, so I think it's something we should monitor.

And your worship, um uh the RCMP, excuse me, um, are having more regular scheduled presence um yeah in front of the school with the direct view of the of the roundabout.

Jamie wanted to say something grandchildren are are coming and going so the it's not every day but they are there more councillor Kowalowicz did you have something I was just gonna add on that maybe a recommendation to the Protective Services uh chair here to communicate with Inspector Preston about increased enforcement uh monitoring that area but sounds like um it's it's starting to happen already but I think that's a very fair first step in this kind of a letter for response sure just to uh maybe a comment to worship on on not on the um pheasant lane one but the other one near Centennial Park, we have had uh I think numerous instances where vehicles have have um run into the the ballards creating considerable damage.

Now, but that wasn't anything to do with the the um the curb that's just going that was just going too fast and not being able to negotiate the corner.

Yeah, okay.

Yeah.

Is this on?

Yep, all right, go ahead and here for five minutes and already get myself into trouble.

Um your worship, if I may clarify, uh and for turnings, what's also important is making sure emergency services are able to make the turn ladder trucks are very important.

So um I haven't been here at that time when the discussion was had.

Uh, what I can say is that just to kind of follow up on your question, what uh we can certainly look at previous ICBC data to see if there has been an issue uh as a start.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yeah.

Oh children are most important resources.

Oh give it up.

I'm gonna call the question all in favor.

Pose that's carried.

So item D is the letter for more doctors in View Royal and I will indeed work with our MLA Mitzi Dean on that.

Movers.

Thank you.

Okay.

Just as an aside, I'll I'll send this to you, but uh I received a letter from our health authority staff or uh a note that just sort of outlines the work that the health authority municipalities are doing with the divisions of practice.

Right.

Thank you.

So I'll I'll I'll forward that off to you.

Good.

All in favor, posed, that's carried.

And then E.

Well, I'm just looking at staff's recommendation on that one.

Town would not allow private landowners to install, as per section five.

Really?

So is this our our own policy that staff is quoting?

That's right.

Yes.

Um counselor rogers.

Yeah.

Um with uh with the policy in mind, and I understand the the generalities and and I can't think of any other circumstance where um So it's uh this is I think a one-off um concern.

And I don't know how this, if we were, and I guess my question is if we were to uh investigate and try to work with the strata on a solution since they are willing to pay all expenses uh to have this gate and this access to a park.

Um I I don't see that that would be a particularly um uh grievous situation where if we were to allow that exception to the uh the policy, particularly uh like I say, if they're paying for it and um it saves them having to walk around or um it's just well so I get I guess the motion would be if you if you if council wanted staff to look at this and report back, it'd be to refer it to staff.

Absolutely.

Yeah, next committee of the whole staff can well not necessarily the next committee of the whole, but we'll we'll refer it to staff.

But I mean update us just some on why why the policy was set like that, because I can't remember.

And there could be lots of good reasons why we don't want to do this on our sure.

Well, I'm sure staff can bring it back, you know, it's within the fullness of a suitable amount of time.

Um but the one thing I would say is that I don't think it can only be one way.

So I think you've got to be prepared for the fact that people on Jalan Place are going to presume that it's now a shortcut and they're gonna go across the strata road to get into the park to go home.

I'm not saying I'm against it, but I just it can't just if it's a public park, it can't just be a one-way gate that the people that live in those townhouses can use to get into the park.

It's got to work both ways.

So that means the townhouse would have to be prepared to be expecting people to come both ways.

And I suspect, and the staff, I'm sure, will report this back, that there's going to be a certain number of amount of liability concerns.

Yeah.

Well, similarly, if we allow this one, then everyone who's in Portage Park, or not Portage, yeah, Portage Park along that fence, they would also have the, you know, we we've sort of set a precedent here.

So why can't they do it too?

Yeah, I mean, CRD definitely has a policy of of not allowing private accesses to parks.

So it's I I don't think it's quite as much as it sounds good, I don't think it's quite as black and white as what we might think.

Question Go ahead.

Yeah.

Um with respect for CRD, we do know that there are um uh gate accesses onto the ENN trail.

Um fr and I it's somewhere around Jedberg, uh one of those uh um uh strata roads, and they have uh gated access to the EN trail.

And I wonder if um uh the proposed um uh development on Portage um um next to Portage Park, whether, because I do know that they have will have and want to have a rear access from their property into Portage Park, whether that would be gated.

So it's another example where you know we we talk about this and this data, we're gonna have another strata on Portage Park wanting that access.

Yeah, I mean I suspect the policy is actually quite a good policy.

Yeah.

But at any rate, we can um we can discuss it when staff bring back the good reasons for that policy.

Yeah.

Okay.

Well, second.

Okay.

Thank you.

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

But what about the children?

Is that your campaign slogan?

Very good.

The letter from Minister Eby is, I mean, it's it's fine that it's here, but this was actually his response to the uh the 13 mayors, and I I replied on behalf of the mayors, so he he sent it back here.

But it's certainly relevant to things we've been discussing as well.

It's a great letter.

Well it will be interesting to see if what all they're doing will uh address the issues of repeat offenders and stranger attacks and so forth that are seeming to be on the rise.

Yeah, at least there's a little bit more substance in this letter than there had been in one or two of the previous yeah, yeah, yeah.

So I'll move a seat.

Okay, thank you.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried.

Next we have the um staff report for the financial plan which was discussed last week at committee of the whole move okay thank you you're okay with that okay everyone's good all in favor opposed that's carried and then we have first second and third of bylaw 1096 so moved moved uh seconder well i'll second it for discussion, so it's on the floor sorry what's the problem?

We're on the bylaw.

Yeah, I know.

I'm just curious as what the issue was but councilor rogers, did you want to speak to it?

I mean, this is what we we covered at committee of the whole last week.

Yeah, that's right.

And uh and all the uh months of special meetings um you know leading up to it.

So I don't think there's any surprises.

Okay, Councillor Lemmon.

No, yeah, there's no surprises, but um taxes are going up in View Royal, and and uh we expected that.

I don't think we expected them to go quite this high.

Um, and I'm sure that our communications will explain and express that most of it comes down to the need for additional policing.

Um, and you know, I think when inspect when Superintendent Preston was speaking to us last week, um, we were all surprised by the numbers that related to Victoria's um calls um for the RCNP, and we had the highest per capita number of calls um in the West Shore.

So it's money well spent, but it's still gonna hurt.

So just for clarification, it's a five per 5.5% tax increase for the average person, right?

Yeah, a household.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah, and I mean every every municipality is is struggling this year, right?

Sanage, I think, is at 6.7, Colwood is is over five.

Um everyone I've read is is up there.

And as Councilor Lemon said, uh a lot of the reason for the additional increase is the simply the the RCMP contract that's finally being resolved and settled.

And it's a significant increase in in pay for the RCMP to bring them in line with the municipal police forces.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Okay.

Everyone's good.

All in favor?

Opposed.

That's carried.

Thank you, Steph.

And then lastly is adoption of bylaw one zero eight three.

New adoption.

Thank you.

Second.

Okay.

It's moved and seconded.

So um this will be coming back to us on the form and character.

Questions later.

It'll be coming back for a development permit, I'm sure, uh at some point.

Yeah.

Okay.

Good.

Councillor Matson.

And I still can't support this because of the potential damage to our portage park playground.

Okay.

I'll be going against it.

I will relay that to your friend Minister E B.

I'm just commenting on housing, right?

Tell them about the other 800 houses we've approved this year.

Yeah.

Okay, so all in favor?

Opposed.

So Councillor Mattson's opposed.

That's carried.

So we've come awfully quickly to question period.

So we will pause for a minute if anyone would like to call in.

It's 778-402-9227, 778-402-9227.

And when prompted enter conference ID 134 001 013 pound.

So we'll just pause there for a minute if anyone would like to call in questions can be about anything that was on the agenda tonight or anything at all as long as it is a question.

And don't um forget our CAO meeting next week should be in everybody's calendars what day is that Tuesday as always surprising Wednesday I'm just oh my have any callers on the line stuff?

Your worship, we have a caller with the last four digits seven seven five eight.

Okay, thank you.

Familiar.

Caller with the last four digits 7758.

Would you like to ask a question?

7758.

You may need to press star six to unmute yourself.

No comment.

Okay, thank you.

No comment.

No comment tonight.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

And there's no questions in the room.

Okay.

So then we just need a motion to adjourn.

So move.

Good second.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone.

Thank you, Steph.