Council Meeting

Good evening, neighbors, and uh welcome to the uh Town of View Royal Council meeting for Tuesday, July 15th, 2025.

Uh, this will be our last meeting before our August break, and we'll pick up council meeting uh on the 2nd of September.

Uh before we begin, I'll just um read the territorial acknowledgement that we recognize the Quangwan-speaking people known today as the Esquamalt Nation and the Songhees Nation, and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.

Uh, to provide comments virtually uh during the public participation period or to ask a question during question period, you will see a QR code or a URL on the live webcast stream screen or a URL on the town's website under live webcast.

Scan the QR code or type in the URL through the form that pops up.

Type in your comment or question to be read aloud at the appropriate time by a member of our webcast team.

You will need to provide your name and your street name on the forum or if you are speaking in council chambers.

Public participation comments are limited to five minutes for each speaker and must be related to an item on the agenda.

Question period is open to any question, uh, but is limited to two minutes for each speaker.

You will be timed.

This meeting will be recorded by participating in the webcast.

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

Can I get an approval of the agenda?

And if uh uh a member of council wishes under the consent agenda, this is the opportunity to pull that agenda item out and we'll place it in section 11 for discussion.

So if you would like to zip down to um the consent agenda, which is 10, uh then if there's anything you would like to pull out of there, we can pull it out.

There's no debate on it, we'll discuss it under 11.

Counselor Lemon.

I would like to pull out um number D under section 10.

Yeah.

At trucks.

Okay.

Leading under section.

Yes, I'd like to pull uh B into section 11, please.

This is um the destination greater Victoria.

Okay, so uh item 10B will now become 11A, Elna, and uh item 10B will become 11B.

Any others?

Okay.

Uh with that, can I get a motion to approve these things so moved by councillor moved by councillor mattson second by counselor rogers all those in favor any opposed seeing none opposed motion carries and uh i think that well i i missed actually an opportunity to read a bit of a statement and i did have one so i will insert here if i may um so there's been some recent announcement at the crd where i said as a director um i let council know and it's actually been a media release that the crd has voted in favor of a regional art service.

So instead of Victoria, uh, View royal, Oak bay sanitic picking up the tab for some of the operations downtown, as this new service will include the Mary Winspear um uh theater there as well as the two theaters downtown and leaves the door open for a West Shore arts uh um facility in the future.

So instead of just a few um municipalities paying for it, that will be spread out throughout the CRD.

And the Gulf Islands actually volunteered to join the service, even though the regional um districts didn't have to participate.

So that's good um good there.

Uh there is also an announcement that CRD has purchased the what was known as the Campor Lands, which are where all the logging lands around our water reservoir.

And that will take effect.

I think the logging will cease during the summer and it's only being logged in parts of it, and that will preserve the watershed for our only water reservoir for the generations to come.

So it was an investment, but I think an investment in our future that's worthy of some celebration.

Did have an opportunity to meet with our member of Parliament and we talked uh quite at length about uh potential um strategies for revising uh island rail as well as other challenges the municipality is having with keeping up with infrastructure and growth.

Um I'll meet later this week with Esquimalt Nation who's hosting a meeting with uh CRD Esquimalt and View Royal about the EN Rail line uh and the use of the corridor.

Don't expect anything big to come out of it, but it allows us to get closer together on the requirements for both Songhees and Asquimalt Nation.

So with that, I think that brings us to public participation period.

Is there anybody here in the room that would like to address council on anything related to the agenda?

Claire.

Good evening.

Uh Claire McDougall, View Royal Avenue.

I just wanted to comment on the grants and aid section.

Um I was very excited to hear about the work uh being done by this group uh working with people with spasticity up at Victoria General Hospital.

Um so they've applied for a grant and aid, and I really hope that we support their request.

And um when I was looking at their information, it's um it's all about bringing together those that are affected by spasticity, and that is a great opportunity for those people to be around folks who really understand what they've been through and provide peer support to each other.

As a retired healthcare worker, you know, we can talk to people till we're blue in the face.

But when people experiencing a condition get to talk to someone else that has that, um it it can it's very helpful.

And healthcare workers can't say, you know, it's a big deal to connect people, but if they come of their own volition to a um public gathering, that's their consent to talk, you know, and and meet with each other.

And there's great value in that.

So and um having organized something in the community, I do know it's really hard to find reasonably priced things, and um to feed anybody is a fortune, but you have to it does cost, and I don't know about the level of support or anything, but I really hope we support them.

Thank you.

That's clear.

Is there anybody else that would like to address council on anything on the agenda?

Donna.

Did we do something bad lately because you haven't been with us?

Uh the last couple of council meetings are getting to be concerned a little bit?

Oh thank you.

I saw the green light.

Um I wanted to speak to the urban forest strategy.

I did not fill out the form.

I thought that it was kind of onerous and overwhelming for somebody who doesn't bring any great expertise to the topic.

Um, but I did want to um express a point of view that we have lost opportunities to protect um large trees at the development of the Royale, the Grand Infer, Erskine Lane, and the aspired development.

And I think it's more important to save mature existing trees than it is to make people plant three trees for every one tree that they took down.

And there's much more value in one mature tree than somebody coming along and planting a fig tree and a plum tree afterwards to comply to the bylaw.

And I couldn't wade through that whole thing to find a place to say that, so I'm coming here to say that.

Thank you.

Appreciate your comment.

Thanks, Don.

Anyone else would like to address counsel on anything related to the agenda.

Going once, twice three times.

Carl, have we got any forms online that people have submitted that they would like to address council?

Mayor Tobias, no submissions so far this evening.

Thanks, Carl.

Appreciate that.

So I think that brings us down to petitions and delegations.

We have uh Jane and Mr.

Calwell uh for the View Royal Climate Coalition on Adaptation and Mitigation of World Resilient View Royal.

Okay.

So I'll just introduce myself.

Do we need to introduce ourselves?

Sure, for the record, it'll probably be good because it will be taped for future use.

Okay, thank you.

Um, I'm Jane Gavinshire from um the View Royal Climate Coalition.

And I'm Richard Caldwell from the same coalition.

Just wanted to add, thank you for the warm welcome when we came in.

And I'm a retired engineer, energy systems, also an educator in the area of alternative energy with a particular focus on energy storage.

It's a great community.

I've lived here for 13 years.

So we have the correct slide up, so we'll get rolling here.

As we face increasingly unstable and more destructive weather, hotter, drier, smokier summers, and increased risk from extreme rain events, more flooding events.

Our committee, the View Royal Climate Coalition, strongly recommends that we need to meet the climate emergency that was declared by the View Royal Council in 2019 with an increased urgency that it warrants.

To that end, we have several asks.

We would like Council to consider recommendations that address mitigation, lowering emissions, and adaptation, helping to make our community climate change more resilien more resilient.

These dovetail with goals of our Municipal Climate Action Plan, Strategic Plan, and sustainability checklist and need to be included in the OCP.

Next slide.

Natural asset management.

Being smart with what we've got, our first ask is to get a natural asset inventory completed and for these natural assets to be identified and protected within our OCP.

Some of the staff had successfully completed the NAM roadmap program, but unfortunately have had no time to complete the necessary natural assets inventory.

Since time is of the essence, the VRCC strongly urges council to resolve capacity issues so we can get these identified and protected in the OCP before the zoning bylaws happen.

A prime example of a natural asset that needs urgent protection is Millstream, our fragile jewel in the Crown.

We strongly urge Council to use the funds in the parks acquisition trust from the sale of Millhill properties and work with organizations such as the Land Conservancy to establish a new park that protects riparian zones on both sides of Millstream.

Next slide, please.

We move on now to 1720 Wilfort Road, the area outlined in red on this map.

This needs to be identified in the OCP as off limits to future development.

The slope near Millstream is extremely unstable, and any development would do untold damage to the surrounding and extremely sensitive ecosystems and destroy much of our critical biodiversity.

Our neighboring Langford has just completed a survey on environmental development area guidelines.

We would like to see the same due process happening in Rureau with its EDPA, and in addition, finally make the sustainability checklist more meaningful and accountable.

While daytime air temperatures are substantially reduced with greater canopy cover, retaining as much permeable surfaces as possible is important for lowering nighttime temperatures.

Therefore, it is critical to public health to support gentle density along with the small scale housing as promoted by the province that the View Rural Housing Advisory Committee worked on just last spring.

This was to meet the upzoning requirements in Bill 44 that have not yet had time to take shape.

And in regards to the urban forest strategy survey, we strongly support this core action establish a town arborist or urban forester position within parks to broadly enhance urban forest outcomes.

However, we must register our severe disappointment with the proposed 30% canopy cover when 40% or more is needed to offer the best climate mitigation for our urban residents.

Victoria is aiming for 40% and Sanich 44%.

Next slide, please.

Emissions reporting.

Next ask is for the town to deeply assess and Victoria's lead by requiring buildings over 10,000 square feet to be to file emissions reports.

By first including in this year all of the town's operating buildings, the town hall, public safety building, it sets an important precedent.

From page 52, View Royal's Community Systems Action Strategy, Decarbonization Existing Buildings, supports deep energy retrofits.

The town of View Royal has limited jurisdiction over requirements for existing buildings, building retrofits, but in respect to our climate emergency, all our town has an opportunity and a duty to influence and better enable building owners to make economic investments in the energy efficiency of their buildings.

Victoria Council has unanimously endorsed a motion like this for 10,000 square feet.

They want to speed up what the city calls its decarbonization of existing buildings, serious problem here, with the belief that data gleaned from this exercise will spur existing building monetizations and make buildings more livable, safety, more safe, and affordable.

Next slide, please.

That clean construction.

Thank you.

Why clean construction doesn't equal costly construction?

Our third ask is for V Roll to implement a buy clean procurement policy and to mandate that all new bills use clean construction materials.

Buy clean equals governments buying clean construction materials and design and incentivizing the market to move to clean and build clean.

Embodied carbon.

Embodied carbon equals emissions from construction materials we use to build.

Cement, structural steel, rebar, insulation, and drywall are now made clean in Canada.

Let's build Canada strong and clean.

Thank you.

Next slide, please.

Our fourth and final ask is for the town to allocate all the revenues from Fortis BC in the form of the municipal operating fee to support our community's direct transitions to green heating and cooling systems.

Allocation of revenues from Fortas into an emissions reduction program should be a prudent part of any long-term program goal of making View Royal's town buildings and our community as a whole the net zero carbon municipality.

Provide free heat pumps where required, or at least much larger subsidies.

$300 doesn't cut it.

Even consider working with other municipalities to increase the amount of the fee, this Fortis BC fee.

And it will help provide more revenues for rebate programs and avoid oversubscribing.

Fortis operating fee is paid to View Royal.

It can be referenced in View Royal documents.

And for the last few years it's averaged at least $90,000.

And focus this revenue stream into public statements of commitment and improvements.

Remember that this annual fee indirectly reflects the quantity of local air pollution emissions dumped into View Royal plus the thousands of tons annually of carbon dioxide emissions worsening global warming every day.

Incremental improvements in emission reductions here are no longer a viable town plan.

Our collective future will be determined by the decisions that you and I and we all make.

We are all in this global warming threat together.

We are in a deep hole.

Global warming is a deep dangerous hole, and we should stop digging.

This raging wildfires, or this precious children traipsing through lush green fields and intact forests.

The town of V Rol has done a stellar job of implementing numerous climate action initiatives.

But let us not rest on our laurels, as the future of our grandchildren is at stake.

I would like to end with this poignant quote from Elizabeth May.

I weep and I fight.

This is what grandmothers must do.

What we can and must do now is keep up the pressure for meaningful work to protect the biodiversity and hold atmospheric carbon to as low a level as possible.

Next slide, please.

Thank you so much for your kind attention.

If you have any questions or would like more resources regarding any of our asks, we would be more than happy to accommodate.

And then on the last slide, I have a list of resources that we put together for you.

Thank you so much.

Thanks, Jane and Richard, and the rest of the coalition for showing up tonight.

Not only appreciate you taking your time to come out and share your thoughts and views with council, but also knowing how much time it took to get this together.

So thank you for doing that.

It's our normal practice that we don't make a decision on what you submit uh uh immediately.

Um and one of the counselors will bring up, I'm sure, uh, this back for um uh a future council meeting under New Business.

Um but if you could stay planted for a second and just see if my colleagues have any questions about this first questions only.

Councilor Mattson, start with you.

Yeah, what exactly is clean construction materials i'm oh um low carbon low carbon hot so how does that different well they've different we've requested a lot of the carbon or in their process they've used a lot less carbon so it's much cleaner okay another example is uh green steel which dramatic and in the manufacturing process green steel releases like 90% less carbon dioxide than the typical steel process.

And I know how you like to compete with Langford.

Langford always already has clean cement.

Any other questions?

One of my questions was uh who does clean construction?

For the coalition.

Questions?

Councilor Registration.

Yeah, thank you.

And Langford's a good example.

Um are there any other municipalities in the CRD that do?

Uh I'm not sure, but um in one of the resources under the clean construction, there's links and links and links to a whole bunch of resources.

And there there's also you know procurement standards for you know clean construction as well, so you can use that to work off of.

And there is support for communities that want to go for clean construction.

Sorry.

With respect to Fortis revenue, uh interesting, but who does that?

Who who does uh charges the Fortis the the kind of revenues and operation fees that you're suggesting?

No.

We do, but you know, it sounds like um there could be a heck of a lot more than what was actually paid.

How do we go about that?

How do you go about what?

The Fortis revenue.

Yes.

So on your on your last page with respect to revenue Fortis uh municipal fee charges, um, you know, it shows how much is actually paid and how much estimated, you know, that we could get, correct?

So how how do we make that jump?

I don't understand through the illustration here.

Um, are the municipalities uh charging higher rates than than we are, and we should be adapting similar bylaws?

Uh, my understanding that the vast majority uh are charging their customers the municipal fee of of approximately three or three point zero nine percent on the bills.

Good question.

I know of no exceptions to that.

Probably the BC Utilities Commission has uh made it clear that they're all gonna get roughly the same amount of money off the gas bills.

All those numbers come straight out of uh Uroyal's documentation.

Anyways, we'll follow that up.

Thank you.

So I I think there's an opportunity.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Thank you again, Richard and Jane.

Appreciate it.

And you and the coalition are free to stay for an action-packed uh uh agenda if you want to, or you're free to go as well and enjoy the uh the warm sun.

Um I think that brings us down to seven staff reports uh for official community plan review and update for the vision survey.

Good evening, uh Mayor and Council.

Uh purpose of tonight is to provide a bit of an update on the vision survey.

Uh we discussed that last week at the committee of the whole and then also provide an opportunity for council to provide a review uh and comment on the uh the draft vision survey.

Uh it was attached to the uh the staff report.

So hopefully uh mayor and council have had a chance to take a look at it, and um uh yeah, I'll get into the uh presentation.

So just as a bit of uh uh background, um we had uh proposed to do uh engagement on this uh on the vision uh back in May, but we have done a bit of a pivot uh since then.

Uh so that was um back in May, uh May 13th, 2025.

Um council had wanted to uh review the uh vision and land use survey um before going to the public.

And then at the following meeting, uh we'd gone to committee the whole on June 10th, and we did a bit of a uh scope change on the OCP.

Uh just as a reminder, focusing on the uh TOA and the um the SMA, so uh focusing on the uh housing legislative uh updates for December 31st, 2025, and um staff and council, or rather the committee had discussed uh what would be required to move forward with the vision and land use survey.

And we had discussed that significant amendments would be required prior to coming forward with a survey, likely seeing the removal of all the questions on the uh the uh different land use scenarios.

So uh for tonight um what was uh prepared is a new survey that we're calling the uh the uh draft vision survey.

Um we're looking at potentially launching it later this week with the idea that it would be open over the course of the summer until the first week of September.

And um where we've how we've gotten to this point now is uh this is feedback provided through the vision and guiding Principle Survey that was opened between January 24th and February 18th earlier this year.

So this is really an opportunity to ask if we get it if we got it right.

What we'd be asking the uh the public for feedback on is uh three uh draft vision statements that have been prepared uh by review of staff and our consultant, urban systems, uh, by looking at all the feedback that has been provided, uh both quantitative and qualitative, um, and asking respondents to identify their preferred vision statement.

There's also an option to provide written feedback if there is additional comments, uh suggestions, or ideas that uh respondents have on the vision statements that have been prepared.

And then the second part of the uh vision survey is to ask respondents to indicate their general level of support of the 11 draft goals that have been prepared.

And just like the vision statement, these are a review of the feedback that we received to date, as well as feedback, sorry, as well as reviewing the existing draft goals that we or existing goals that we have in our OCP or 2011 OCP.

And we also have an opportunity for respondents to provide written feedback on those goals as well.

We we're going to have a busy uh a busy fall within with engagement.

Um we're going to be circling back on the uh Western Gateway Community Corridor.

We'll also be engaging on the general uh policies of the official community plan.

Um this would include things like transportation, environment, uh economy, et cetera, uh, as we discussed last week at uh community of the whole.

And um we'll also be doing our general uh uh required amendments for the um the TOA and uh small scale multi unit housing.

So it'll be a busy fall.

Uh so staff are recommending doing uh engagement now just so we can um have uh enough time to do engagement on the Western Gateway Community Corridor and the general policy.

Um the idea being that once we do that engagement, um we'll reconvene in the uh in the winter or spring uh likely of 2026 and we'll have a draft uh OCP for uh the public and council to review.

Um so we are trying to uh kind of get back on track with timing and and knowing that there are kind of uh steps to uh uh complete to uh get to uh next spring.

Um the recommended motion uh for tonight uh that uh staff prepared is that the um uh council instruct the vision survey be published and that we uh carry forward with uh engagement uh in the summer of 2025.

There are all uh alternative recommendations as well um uh for council's consideration.

And um I uh can go through those briefly.

Uh the first is just that if council has uh amendments or or recommendations to change the survey.

Um as we discussed in the past, it'd be very beneficial for staff uh to have council make uh those amendments via motions, uh, just so we're we're all on the same page and we actually would we incorporate the feedback as as council wants it.

Um the idea being that if um if that feedback could be provided tonight, uh we could still move forward with the the uh the vision survey by end of week.

If council um feels that that's uh not appropriate timing, um option two is to uh engage on the vision survey in in the fall.

And um the the third option is um no engagement on the uh the vision survey and um uh council can um uh instruct staff uh not to publish the uh the survey at all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Sterling, before I go to questions just for um uh council to consider, we may want to at this point um uh add something or delete something, but instead of a personal preference, it needs council now to uh make that recommendation.

We all need to agree to it rather than one person's opinion so if you're gonna come up with a suggestion please put it forth as a motion so we can all move toward um uh voting on that or deliberating on that um so let's start with questions if there's any questions for staff at all counselor matsen yeah you having gone through these and uh I gather a consulting firm put this together and it they list goals which I think pretty much everybody's gonna say strongly support because they're just motherhood issues that I can't see anybody taking any exception to.

So I I'm just wondering about why we're doing this if we're just gonna get back a lot of responses saying that yeah we strongly support these or are are we doing this just so that we get the public to say yeah we agree that with everything sort of council's come up with or staff has come up with here.

Anyways that that's my problem I just don't know what we're gonna get out of this other than everyone saying strongly support because uh most of the issues are quite supportable.

Really through the mayor um sorry go through through the mayor.

Part of the reason we're we're we're coming back is to ask if we got it right.

So we did engage with the public um back in uh January to February.

So this is an opportunity to uh re-engage with the public um and uh kind of ensure that their their voice has been heard and and provide an opportunity for them to um provide feedback again on what what uh we heard from them.

Okay, so now I understand these were developed questions are developed through the input you received from the public previously, and we just want confirmation that this is what they the public felt was important.

Is that correct?

Through the mayor, that's correct.

Councillor Rugg or Councillor Brownland, Councillor Rugg.

It's just uh I'm supportive of the motion of your recommendation, but uh putting surveys up in the summer, I just hope there's a long time for people to complete it because you know, with the weather being like it is and people weigh um you know elections and surveys, people just don't tend to sit you know sit out in the sunshine and do surveys.

So um as long as it's got a long period of time for people to uh respond, I think that I'd be supportive.

And what was the time again, Sterling?

The that it will be open for staff are recommending that uh the survey be published this week.

Um it could be uh by end of week, it could go live on the website, uh engage re royal.ca and uh staff are also recommending that it be open until probably the the first week of September.

We haven't we haven't set up a hard date.

Um as part of that process, uh project team would likely try to go out in the in the public and do some pop-ups, try to um hand up some uh project cards, get people online.

It is a fairly short survey, um, likely kind of in the range of the five minute work.

Um so probably more opportunity for people to uh fill it out even if staff are with them.

Um so we'd hope to do what we did with the uh the original uh or the first uh vision and and guiding principle survey which was going out into community and um trying to uh get people online and and going and doing the survey that answer your question is that enough time from your perspective.

Okay.

Council rogers, please.

Yes, thank you.

Um the uh the draft visions uh you know there's by 2050, in 2050, you know, it um so is that the vision that we plan to be, you know, the state that we plan to be when we get to that year, and and how do you how do we see ourselves in 2035?

Through the mayor.

Uh to answer your first question, uh yeah, that is the uh the the vision.

Uh it's the idea is uh vision to 2050, uh regarding the second question about uh where we see ourselves in in 2035.

That would probably uh be identified through the completion of our uh different policies and objectives.

So as we uh develop uh the policies through our uh review and update, we'll have an implementation and action strategy, and uh that'll identify different um uh actions that can be completed at different points over the uh over the next 25 years.

Yep so that that is helpful so we're just dealing with goals we're gonna see strategies and and uh action items something that we had missed in the 2020 OCP attempt um okay thank you the my next question is um uh with number three um rolling cycling or easy driving my my question one is what's easy driving and um also why don't we include transit through the uh th through the mayor um just it it's just a draft um i'm i'm not sure i can i can speak specifically to those um if council feels strongly that's uh potentially an amendment we can make to the uh to the the statement okay great thank you hold on to that one and just come up with uh our next round uh as a motion do you want a lot of whereas with that no zero whereas please uh okay uh more questions though yes one more question.

So um at the the end of it um uh you know some individual may want to add more comments um so it says um in uh band if you have comments on the draft um and you want to make a comment please indicate which which goal referring to will the goals themselves be numbered or lettered so that I can say goal B here's where I think should be added or removed through the sh uh through uh the mayor staff and um staff can make that uh that change um it is a bit different with what we see in the print version versus the online version.

Okay.

Um it's a bit wonky printing from the the the the website to the uh the Word document that kind of compresses and and shifts things around.

Um we can make sure that the that they're numbered in the um in the uh online version though.

Okay, thank you.

That's reassuring.

Anybody else got a question?

I'll go with Councillor Lemon for a comment and I think Councilor Rogers for motion.

Sterling's busy.

Um one and two.

I don't want to wordsmith this, um, but one and two are close and maybe a combination of those I would be more comfortable with.

But what I wanted to say is, and and counselor Rogers raised this point, is I think in each of them we can get rid of the by 2050 or in 2050 because the vision statement is by its very nature future looking.

Um, and we know that this is a an OCP that is looking to 2050.

So I think we could just kill those two words at the start of whichever one we go with.

Um and well, you know, maybe that needs a motion.

I don't know.

Yeah.

Um I think what we could do is just include this in Councilor Rogers' motion for changes if it's that simple.

Sure.

Yeah, sure.

And and I like, well, maybe not everybody does, but I like words like thriving and welcoming in whichever way we go rather than desirable.

We could have desirable, but I think thriving and welcoming is you know represents the the alive community we have and expect to have.

If you've got the question number and then the amendment, uh then we can package those as a motion if you want to go through those.

Sure.

Um if so uh my first motion would be with respect to uh statement option number three that um since we're specifying walk, so it would include walking, rolling, cycling, easy driving, and transit or or trans.

Was your intention to take out easy and just put driving in?

Driving, yeah.

Okay.

So um question number one?

And add to add transit.

Yeah, thank you.

Public transit.

And that was question number option three.

Option three?

Okay, and what was the other uh you had another amendment you wanted to add?

Well the other the other would be with respect to all options, is is um uh I I think the it's confusing as is uh councillor Lemon and I are suggesting is that um you know saying in 250 by 250 um you know it somehow was we're gonna be doing this continuously, continuously improving um so that it won't be you know we'll see it in 2030, 2035, 2040.

Um but I'm not exactly sure and uh you know how to how to wordsmith that as a as a motion.

Um you know continuously strive is continuously thriving uh to become a welcoming committee.

So it's it's just saying continuously and recommending that uh realizing that we're not setting a a goal that at the end of it.

That's what I'm so I don't know if it would be.

So we just eliminate kind of 2050 uh throughout it, um, because that's uh gonna be a future anyway.

And the way it's gonna be done is we're gonna be redoing this every five years anyway.

So that goalpost will shift.

Yeah.

So if we can say that one one of the motions that uh adding transit, uh public transit, the other is that if you will is continuously evolving, striving, flourishing, thriving, and and so with all these points by doing such and such.

So it it it's just proves that we're um we're action every year, not just by that one day.

Yes, sir.

And uh Councillor Lemon, you had specific language that you wanted to prove.

I'd I I did was that the motion I want to second.

Um, if you add yours, then we could second that.

That was kind of it.

So my my um I would like to see in 2050 just have the get get rid of those starters in 2050 and by 2050 it just say Pew Royal is a desirable community.

Pew Royal is a thriving community.

And that's didn't that's what it's recognized as by 2050.

Okay.

So just to recap so nobody's as confused as I am um so we're gonna uh add um uh takeaway easy just driving and public transit as an option for three and uh just uh uh on the entire document elimination of uh the the end state of 2050.

Did I sum that up uh right, Councilor Rogers, Councilor Lemon?

Uh so we got a mover and a seconder.

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

None opposed, motion carries.

Thanks, John.

Uh no, that was uh specific feedback.

So now what we have to do is with that feedback, which we need somebody to move the recommendation.

I will move the recommendation.

So discussion.

Councilor Rogers.

Yeah, um, I had actually some other motions amendments to the goals.

I mean, it's it's fine.

We've taken care of the um uh the visions, but there are individual goals that I think um uh should be tailored.

Yeah.

Kate if you uh if you can package those up and we get a mover in a second or uh to other support or not and we can go from there.

Um well yeah you know I'll give you an example climate action you know undertake climate action adaptation mitigation efforts efforts I mean efforts is like you know we're only doing you know at 2% uh greenhouse gas reductions that's an effort does that you know wrap it all up no you know there there's um um the whole climate action initiative that we have is is uh is very targeted.

And I don't think the uh climate action resilience uh um reflects um the you know in real serious intents to reduce greenhouse gases in uh country.

Have you got specific words that we're at at the at that point now, Councilor Rogers.

I know specific words, that's fine, but either that or it goes back to staff and would delay a response.

Counselor McKenzie.

Just a comment on what Councilor Rogers just said.

I think there is the opportunity for someone to put that in the the box at the end of the goals where it says like, do you have any comments on the draft goals and and then to indicate which ones?

So if somebody wanted to kind of if they didn't fully agree with one because of how it's worded, uh they could then suggest different words or if let me go to counselor Matts and then I'll go back to you, Councillor Matt.

I think all these goals are just broad goals.

And then later on you figure out how to achieve those goals with and that's what and John I think you're getting too into the weeds because we just want this is the broad direction we're going and then we determine how we're going to do that as we move along.

And I don't think it it just muddies the water from my perspective if we start getting too specific in these at this point.

Okay.

And then uh from um uh counselor McKenzie.

It's an interesting point that um you know we're we're s we're asking our survey in folks is that they're gonna save up all their comments.

Maybe they've got um they had comments on all nine of the goals.

And um so uh number you know the end will we have enough space for everyone to write a paragraph on each of the nine goals that um or or should we be considering them this in the format so that you know on on climate action there would be strong support, some support, no support comment.

So that it's it's then sp people have an opportunity to specifically and we know that they've specifically referred, made comments on climate or economic development and so forth.

I I um I worry that you know it it seems like it's gonna be the best way for us to understand what the uh public response and comments and suggestions were at each category when they've hit it rather than asking them to sum it all up at the end.

Quick question on Sterling is have you got a um character limit on any of the comments that are coming in if somebody did want to write uh an encyclopedia.

Uh Merit Tobias I believe that the uh social pinpoint site has a a default of 300 characters for a short answer.

Um we can make it a uh like a a text box like a paragraph answer.

Um off the top of my head I for I I forget exactly I think I I selected the paragraph option so if somebody wanted to write um you know a paragraph or two they could put that in um to uh counselor rogers uh uh consideration for maybe an amendment um to the survey um the option of doing uh individual uh text box uh after each um uh each goal and even asking you know level of support um staff could do that as well if uh if council wanted to make that a motion i'll step in that cool um then uh we're gonna move on a second or just to allow a text box uh for each one of the options on goals.

All those in favor?

Any opposed.

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

Um and anything else?

Any other comments on the survey?

No, I think you're done.

To be honest with you.

Sorry.

Um, you know, opportunities uh for mixed use and non-residential development to support local regional economic priorities.

You know, where does it say that you know we're the uh the the OCP, one of the goals is to support our local businesses?

Does that say the same thing?

Supporting the local business not quite on staff uh yeah it's a good question uh through the mayor uh councilor rogers i i think uh important to recognize that these the uh these vision um goals are applicable to the entirety of the document i think your uh uh specific comment you'd see something like that in uh an objective and policy specific to the economic development section of the OCP um so I I think you know hearing that that's that's something that's um important.

Uh I I do recognize that, but um I don't know if we can uh get into that level of detail.

Uh we might start making these goals quite quite long if we start adding uh multiple points.

Point taken.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

I look forward to the strategies.

Okay, so we got a um mover and a seconder, I think, are ready for the uh motion to um accept the survey, and uh that staff will send it out.

Um all those in favor.

Any opposed, seeing none opposed motion carries.

It was actually I think a recommendation with options, but we did it anyway and made it.

So Sterling, thank you very much for your patience.

Thank you, uh, Councillor Rogers for your observations and your motions.

Um, and I think that brings us down to Ivan.

I believe this is you for Parks and Trails Master Plan Grant Opportunity, which nobody says no to for other people's money.

I was wrong.

Good afternoon, Marion Council.

So while I'm not Ivan, he will be presenting the next one.

Okay.

So the purpose of this report is to seek council's approval in applying for UBCM's um strategic priorities fund 20 2025 grant in support of the Parks and Trails Master Plan identified in the 2025-2029 financial plan.

So the strategic priority fund is one of three funding streams and delivered through the Canada Community Building Fund.

The fund is an application-based program which pools a portion of the annual fund for strategic investments that are considered large in scale, regional in impact, or innovative.

So the support of the Canadian Community Building Fund, national objectives and productivity and economic growth, as well as a clean environment and strong cities and communities.

So the town's parks master plan was adopted in 2017 and did not include the development of trails within our parks.

Given the interconnectedness of parks and trails, it has been recommended that the town develop combine these in our next version of the plan, our updated version, which will guide the future of the town's parks, shorelines, access, and trail networks, and ensuring that they reflect the evolving needs of our community.

The project objectives are the following: to undertake parks and trails needs assessment, to review existing park inventory, and undertake an analysis of the existing parks and trails, including conditions, accessibility, and usage patterns, a review the 2020 2017 plan and identify strengths, opportunities, and needs for improvement or weaknesses.

Identify existing and new amenities and facilities and opportunities and where we need once again to improve.

Then we're going to also look for where we can have upgrades, accessibility improvements, indigenous cultural presence within those parks and trails, and generally just to look at standards.

So we anticipate that put for a potential of like financial impact that the parks and trails master plan is identified as a non core project in the N129 in the 2025 2029 financial plan.

And the project timeline is set for next year, 2026, 2027, with the total budget of $100,000 coming from the LGCAP Growing Communities Fund Reserve and or the Casino revenue.

So this grant opportunity presents an opportunity to offset some of those costs that the town would be incurred, which would also, you know, bring lesser financial impacts to those within our town.

So the recommendation aligns with our strategic plan, specifically goal six, six A, update Proxity Master Plan timing 2026, 2027, and the development of the plan 6B.

So there's also existing community plan policies and actions, which we would also trigger with this funding grant.

So our recommendation is that council authorize staff to apply for the UBCM's strategic priority fund 2025 grant in support of the town's parks and master plan, parks and trails, sorry, master plan, and identified in the 2025 2029 financial plan.

And that council supports the proposed activities and provide overall grant management and support any potential cost overruns.

Of staff recommendation.

Second.

Certainly not.

That's fair.

Um question how much of a grant are we asking for?

So this would be determined as we continue through the process.

Um, as part of the program, there are a list of um things that are ineligible that we can't claim any kind of grant funding for.

So we'd have to go through those and kind of identify what exactly we're applying for.

Okay, so we're we're not sure, but we're gonna apply for as much as we can, is what the ask is.

Okay, I got that.

Um let's control questions and comments to just the application of the grant, not about the award of the RFP or what the scope of it is or anything.

This is just to secure money at this point.

All of those opportunities will come later uh when we get down to uh the crunchiness of it.

Counselor Rogers.

Well, the objectives I need clarification on the objectives.

I don't yeah, right, get money.

So I I guess you know, if we are not clear on the exact one of the problems we had with the 2017 plan was we did it on the cheap.

And we limited it just to parks.

We shaved off the trails and left them, you know, literally as garbage.

You know, it was it was you know just incredibly naive and stupid, you know.

But then of course we decided opt cheaply with students that no had no idea on how to do a parks master plan.

So it's um, you know, that that's one of my concerns is that one of the objectives is that we will get a professional uh plan that the plan will not be etched in black and white, you know, that uh you know that counselor Rogers, we're not there yet.

So we're we're applying for a grant for what you're concerned about.

We can deliberate what you're concerned about when it comes time to do that.

We're just applying for the grant right now.

Okay.

So once we get the grant, is this going to be coming back so that we can then uh work on the terms of reference to ensure that we're going to have absolutely that's the staff function that they would come up with uh the project.

So that's already embedded and before an RFP goes out, I'm sure we would see that.

So we guess one of the things is that um with the the official community plan and and um um you know if we don't get the grant, how are we going to fund this uh in order to incorporate into the OCP?

It's it's still outside of the issue.

We can talk about this forever, but should we're just applying for a grant or shouldn't we apply for grant?

That's the only question.

You your worship, I'm I'm just trying to uh understand uh it's a grant opportunity, it's it's grand, but um um I I do have these concerns because obviously we want to make sure that um this is going to be in time and tailored into the OCP.

And it has significant uh implications.

If we're not going to be successful in this grant application, what recourse are staff recommending in order to achieve this for the OCP?

I think it's already laid out in the report that the the funds have already been identified to come out of two other sources for financial implication.

This is an opportunity funding uh for for the grant, right?

So it's either the town pays for everything or we get the grant to offset it.

That's as simple as this this presentation is.

Councilor Brown.

Yeah, there's two parts to the staff recommendation, and the second part is that we support any potential uh cost overrun so we're not only just supporting a grant if there is over cost we're supporting any cost overrun so people have to understand that before we vote but I believe this is just for a parks and trails master plan grant at this point and it'll come back to us if there's we haven't got to the point where we're actually discussing that if I'm unless I'm missing something.

Sorry I appreciate what that would be fun.

Yeah through the chair that is correct.

Essentially, if there's any incurred fees, you'd be informed at a later date.

Yeah, this is just an opportunity to apply for a grant to help us out to achieve an objective that council has already said was a priority.

So we'll have lots of opportunity to get into the weeds and the details about the actual project.

I look forward to it.

Okay.

So we got a mover and a seconder, I think, already.

Yeah.

All those in favor of staff applying for the grant.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

And I think this brings us up to another grant application, which I love other people's money.

So Ivan, uh UBCM grant application for Admiral's Road Improvements.

Thank you, America Bias.

Ivan Leoung, Director of Engineering.

Pretty much the exact same grant that uh Ms.

Curtis has provided.

It is essentially the exact same grant, an OPM from UBCM.

Uh the only difference is that the uh previous discussion was on the capital or the um capacity building stream.

And what I'm bringing forward is a application to um or to a request to make application on the uh capital stream, which is a lot more money.

Um essentially uh the funding limit is a maximum 100% of an eligible cost up to seven million dollars, so it's quite significant for the town of Bureau.

We don't have any projects that are really that much money, so it's um that's good news for us.

Uh, a couple of requirements.

Uh, one is that's the project start date of whatever project that we want to apply for.

Um it cannot start after two years of receiving grant approval, and uh essentially um project completion cannot be later than five years after grant approval.

So that narrows the the amount of projects that we can we can apply for.

And that said, um, staff did a quick review of what we consider to be best value for dollars spent uh with grant money.

And as a result, the recommendation was to apply for the Admiral's Road Active Transportation Improvement Projects.

Um, you know, there's a lot of council discussions that has been had with respect to this project.

One being that there's a lot of moving pieces, and no concept plan has been provided to council just yet, so there might be some questions with respect to that.

Uh so the the grant does allow us to phase our application in the sense that let's apply for the design part, in which case staff and council have the opportunity to collaborate on the option.

And then the next phase would be the construction phase, uh, which would be um the bulk of the dollars.

But I think in our in our uh project summary, it was about four million dollars, 4.3 million dollars.

The reason why we're choosing Admirals Road is there's many reasons why they're listed in the report, but I want to identify three main ones.

One is that uh this project relies significantly on grant funding.

Essentially, if there's no grant funding, this project wouldn't wouldn't go through.

It's just, it requires, I think, over a 50% of it needs to, or well more than 50% of it needs to be grant funded.

Um, there is good value or dollar spent in the sense that it provides casino revenue relief in the design part.

And one of the important one of the more important items is that with the BC Transit Route 40 coming online next year, there's a need to balance the roadway to support that and to encourage uh active travelers in the region.

It is considered in our active transition network plan as an equity-deserving area for myriad of um of the audience.

And so as a result, uh the community would benefit greatly by having an enhanced asset.

That said, we did provide a few alternative options in the table.

Uh these ones are eligible.

Um in terms of dollars spent, uh, staff felt that these would be less so.

Most of it's already funded through DCCs and reserves, so uh it's basically accounted for.

One being the Ministry of Transportation and Transit, they're willing to uh submit a letter of support for this, which is very important given that Admiral's Road is on the Ministry of Transportation and Transit's road corridor.

Um there is a lot of engagement to be done.

So the grant application would be for next year and the year after.

This year is for essentially a First Nations engagement, which we have uh we've we've just met with them actually last week uh with the CASEPS and First Nation.

And they're looking forward to seeing some concepts from us, in which case we would also bring it forward the council this year.

Um Ivan, if I can just um get clarification from you.

So this um would really bring us from um Powell Road to the intersection?

Uh yes, Hallowell Road to the Craigflower intersection.

Yeah, thank you.

Yeah.

Um so the recommendation before you is that council authorized staff to apply for the UBCM strategic priority fund to support the Advil's Road Active Transportation Improvements Project identified in the financial plan.

Thank you.

Staff recommendation.

Second.

Uh moved by Councillor Mattson, second by Councillor Lemon.

Let's go to questions first.

Councilor Roger.

Yes, thank you.

It's an important road.

Obviously, having uh bus number transit 40 in this is also very important.

The um I'm assuming we can talk to Esquan Moltres or Sanjach um uh about this initiative.

Uh Mayor Tobias uh from a high level through our regional director meetings, yes.

Um in terms of getting to the minutiae of the details and not just yet.

Um there are a few moving pieces.

Uh one's uh consulting or uh engaging with First Nations and the highways, which is uh we've engaged with them probably half a year ago and they they seem to still be in support.

But once we kind of get boots in the ground, then that's when we will start engaging with uh with Sanjay and Squabalt, but it'll be probably when we start having more conceptual and detailed designs running.

Thank you.

My my next question is um they do you anticipate any um expanses on in-grown uh in-road?

So are we going to be doing a lot of in-road servicing, um, pipes, drainage, sewer, that kind of stuff as this is work is going on?

Uh yeah, Mayor Tobias, there's actually not a lot of assets underneath our that roadway because it's the ministry's roadway.

We do have some, and we'll we'll be checking on that.

Um that said, uh the focus would essentially be to uh provide uh cycling, transit, and pedestrian infrastructure there.

And then with the help of the act of the transportation master plan, we can take a look at the intersections to see what improvements can be done there.

Yeah, thank you.

And and my last question is um when uh VWOL and Sanich worked on the um the uh Admiral's bridge, um VO was extremely fortunate that we did not hit any uh archaeological significant um uh sites.

Um Sanich did to a tune of an extra million dollars.

So um I I guess in in uh the the grant that we're applying for um and our budget estimates, are we estimating any potential um uh contingencies for archaeological um uh stoppages and um recoveries assessments, etc.?

Yeah, Mayor Tobias, our our estimates for financial plan does have some sort of contingencies because we don't know what we don't know.

So as a result, you have to go to like a class D estimate.

Um in terms of specifically respect to archaeological no is kind of a blanket with unknowns, bedrock and and other unforeseen.

Um but uh I do remember uh Admiral's Road, I was actually the one that designed the road part, not the bridge part, and it was quite an interesting archaeological uh event that happened there.

It was quite neat to be to um to see it.

So sorry, let allow me to elaborate.

Do we figure that you know if we works do go on and we do get the surprises, is this going to be um uh a bill that's going to be all solely on view oil, or are we going to have any ability to share that?

Uh, Mayor Tobias, that will probably be the response of the town, given that it's a town-driven project.

And uh speaking with respect to the roadway in Admiral's Road, um, perhaps a good question to ask our uh neighboring First Nations about uh the roadway, the stories behind it, and to get a better idea and to build that into our future costs.

Um and my actually, sorry, my last point is we've making reference to um um C 180.

Um, but you know, so we C 180 has some presumptions, um, you know, in terms of the design um is um yeah we're not going to lockstep our our um whole design based on what uh we had uh back in 2023 in the active um transportation plan um you know that that's what we see there is not what we're gonna get is it um yeah mayor to bias the active transitation network plan specific specifically admirals road didn't present one option it uh it what it did was it offered a range of things that could be done, and that will be exactly what we'll be bringing forward to council.

Thank you, Councillor rogers.

Thank you, Ivan.

We got uh mover and uh seconder on uh the UBCM grant application for Admirals Road Improvements.

All in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

Thank you, Ivan.

And I think you're gonna stay present for the next one, which is transfercation master plan update recommendation of award.

Yes, thank you, Mayor Tobias.

Um, so uh council has been a part of this journey on the RFP.

I'll say that uh thanks to the help of council in um working with us on the terms of reference.

This has been a very competitive bid process.

So we've received uh seven proposals, all of comparable scope and very comparable prices.

There's you know, I I I know I keep reiterating myself, I haven't seen prices this close before in in bids, but I think with given that we've been working so hard on the terms of reference, we're providing good documents for folks to to bid on.

Um, so long story short, uh, out of our whole point system, Bunt and Associates has been rated the highest.

Um, they're also in terms of the top three that rated them points, they're the lowest cost.

Um Bunt is a very reputable firm.

They are uh have an office in Victoria.

Uh they have extensive local expertise and knowledge, specifically in View Royal.

They did do our six-mile row corridor study, uh, which is a document that drove the roundabout the roundabout project, which has been a success.

Um, they have also been acted uh on our behalf as a third-party reviewer for translation master plans and assessments done for developers.

And overall, the present proposal um, in short, provided uh more for less.

Uh the other two, uh Watt Consulting and Urban Systems are also very comparable.

Uh Watt Consulting is involved with the City of Lankford's Transportation Master Plan and Urban Systems involved in Calwa's Transportation Master Plan.

So they do have experience there, uh, but overall, um, based on the evaluation, Bunt still uh still rated higher.

They do have also experience in having the symbolic relationship between the Translation Master Plan and OCP.

They did work on it with a municipality up island that have the exact same situation as us, to having a simultaneous Transportation Master Plan and OCP, so they understand the challenges and the opportunities that comes with it.

And overall, the the project is basically a budget.

So the recommendation here is that the Transportation Master Plan be awarded to Bunt and Associates in the amount of $199,284, net of GST, and happy to take any questions.

Thank you, Mayor.

Motion tax recommendation.

Moved by Councillor Rogers, seconded by Councillor Matson.

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

Thank you, Mayor.

Seven.

And I think we've got uh item E now, which is a consideration of the two remaining grants and aid.

Those were the two that presented to us, I think during the committee uh of the whole the last time.

Um currently there is room uh to accommodate um uh both if council so chooses.

Um there we we could approve both, we could approve um uh the there's about three options.

We could approve for the amount requested, we could reduce that amount, or we could not approve them uh individually.

Um but I would uh is there somebody willing to make a motion on these council rogers if i would uh move um we grant a thousand dollars microphone oh sorry pardon me um move that we grant a thousand dollars to the uh specificity um uh application okay that's uh they requested how much one thousand yeah pardon me they requested eight thousand two hundred and twenty five okay so that's why I asked the question so your your uh recommendation is for a thousand dollars.

Yes.

Okay.

Uh reserves.

Scott.

Uh just of note, Mayor and Council, uh, the specificity research and awareness society reduced the amount requested um since they presented last week.

So so they're asking for 6,721 now.

Yeah.

So may I give my rationale?

Only if you got a seconder.

Okay.

Is there a seconder for Councilor Rogers Mike?

I'll second for discussion.

There is no second for discussion.

Just to be clear.

Yeah you're second again or you're not second?

Second.

Okay.

Um Council Rogers, go ahead with your motivation.

Um yeah doing some research on this um uh the um sra s dot C A um was created as a cooperative program through uh the COMOAP student of the year, um uh the president that you saw uh present on this.

Um so she launched the nonprofit.

This is a very new nonprofit arising out of UVC this year.

So um I I and and indeed um um the applicant has uh done work with um the doctor and as well as the doctor down in in in the United States, which which part of what's unclear to me is this is whether or not this is a private practice.

And um I understand I know that it's uh the VGH and and doing great work, um, but my concerns is the um the the um the request even at 6,000 is very significant.

Um no other um application as of that amount.

There's been no other applications to any other municipalities, and while this is a CRD regional initiative, there's you know these these uh individuals, these stricken individuals do not just reside in View Royal.

It's an admirable program, I agree, but I would suggest that um the um um location at um for the Scottish Center may not be the only location.

We have the town hall, we have um uh the strawberry veil, other locations that um and it may not have to be in view oil.

Why would it be?

Only because they're making the grant.

And the the um the the Scottish Center does not have the uh cooking uh resources, so that's why the and and does it really have to be you know four thousand dollars worth of catering?

So um I I there's many questions um uh with respect to this, and um I don't think um I I think if other municipalities feel likewise that this is a valid program that they will be happy to um contribute to the equivalent amount.

Thank you, Councillor Rogers.

Counselor Mackenzie.

Yeah, I just think in relation to or think back to some of our other grant and aid um applications, again, this one is much more.

And also in the in I recall us also encouraging those applicants to seek funding from other municipalities as well.

So I agree with Councillor Rogers.

I think I think by reducing the amount, it encourages them to look at other possible funding.

I got the sense when uh presenting that they hadn't really considered um those other those other options.

So I think it will encourage them to do some of that additional research, so that in future years it's a little bit more sustainable than them coming back um requesting the same amount each year.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor McKenzie, Councillor Lennon.

Thank you.

To staff, do we have um any um availability for the town to use the scottish cultural center do we have like an allotment of days we're working on an agreement for an allotment of days but there would still be a considerable fee for using it i believe a reduced fee is being negotiated from what they would charge uh members of the public okay i didn't get that and so the reduced fee would be for us yes with an allotment of days.

That's right.

So would we be able to allot one of our allotted days to another organization?

Sorry, my mic was off.

Um there's insurance implications for hosting events at the Cultural Center.

Okay.

But it's possible.

It's it's possible, but it's not currently part of the contract, which is years into negotiations now.

Okay, thank you.

That we don't have a lot of industry here in View Royal.

We have none.

And one of the things that I think we could overlook is is the spin-off from the hospital, but it does have spin-off.

We're giving money to, or the we're having to entertain a request for an organization that actually is creating North American-wide recognition in View Royal.

And they're asking for money to host it in View Royal.

So, you know, I I agree in some cases that things might be regional in scope, but this thing is international in scope.

Why why would Callwood give some money or the CRD or whatever?

So I think we send some people on a goose chase for some of these things just because we don't want to fund it.

I think this this is direct money into the town of View Royal, into a facility that we helped.

And I think it's for a good cause.

They're not asking for anything else.

That's what they're asking for.

And it puts View Royal on the map.

So I would support the full amount, to be honest with you.

It's not like the whole grant and aid idea was not to save money, was to give out $100,000 judiciously that would give benefit to the community.

And right now we have $57,715 remaining in it.

So that uh my my motion or my my suggestion is that we do support this.

Um there's nobody's beating down our door to ask for grants and aid right now.

It's our responsibility to do it, and I don't think it's uh you know reasonable for something like this to ask everybody in the municipalities to come up with with something like this, if it's a volunteer coming to us for something that I think would do benefit.

So I won't support Councilor Rogers' motion.

I'd like to see us fund the whole thing and and uh assist us in in distributing the grants and aid that we've been uh all voted to do at this time.

So anybody else got a comment or a question?

Counselor Brown.

Yeah, I would be speaking against the motion as well.

Uh rather than having calling it the question and having it defeated, perhaps um mayor you're you could make an amendment, then we could vote on it to to f fund the full amount.

Uh no, I think that uh unless Councillor Rogers was was happy to do that, which I don't think he is, I think it was for a reduced amount.

That's that's fair enough.

No, I would like you to vote on my motion.

Okay.

Anybody else with a comment or question?

Sure.

Councilor Matson.

Yeah, even in terms of I think we still have a fair number of dollars of for school uh the uh school crossing guards and things.

I think that's why the we had such a big amount left over.

But I just have a problem with us spending sixty five hundred dollars on an initiative that is a good initiative, but there's no end of good initiatives.

And so with that, and I would much rather just give a couple of our days, that's my thought, with the uh with the Scottish center, but since staff mentions that it's probably uh a ways away, and that doesn't mean that we're actually going to do this, be able to do it.

Uh I'm quite happy to give them the thousand dollars as at least starting funds for them.

Thank you.

Council Lemon.

I'll be voting against the thousand dollars because I think it's it's of very little help to them.

Um it won't really get them anywhere, especially if they haven't haven't gone outside.

And and the mayor makes a good point.

And so I I you know not too niggled, but I would I would be comfortable giving them five thousand dollars and you know have them figure out um another way to bring food in.

Okay, it looks like we're uh ready.

So let's uh counselor rogers, go ahead.

Yes, thank you.

Um, this isn't about um uh how much money we happen to have left in in on this account.

Um there's um there's always uh surprise initiatives um like the song He is coming up.

Um, you know, where um and and maybe we won't wouldn't want to limit that to 2500.

Maybe it should be 40, 40,000, whatever.

Um, but it's I I think the the point is that um we know very little about this initiative.

Um we we were taking it um and I it's amazing.

I've watched the videos, they're astonishing, but I was able to watch the videos at home and still be equally impressed.

Um and I don't understand um and I think we have not got clarification about what the advocacy here is intended to do.

Is it fundraising?

Is it you know educational um and you know the the whole thing, there's there's many questions and we have not received any letter from uh the physicians that uh are you know really the the uh the miracles of this entire program so it's um I I um I I think it is comes from the UV co-op student initiatives and that's about it.

Okay.

Thank you counselor McKenzie.

Um I actually have a question for staff um if possible so when they were presenting and they did make mention of it being a potential fundraiser.

That kind of raised concerns for me because I didn't know if that was allowed under our uh grant and aid because in that sense I would think a lot of organizations would want funding in order for them to then generate more money.

Um so I just wondered is that allowed under the grant and aid policy uh through the chair I I don't know that we have a specific answer to that right now.

That's a it's a great question, but um it would take us a bit of time to dig into that.

Um, typically, when we're receiving grant and aid applications, we will vet them against the policy, but I I don't know that we have a specific answer for you at the moment.

Any other questions or comments?

So Councilor Rogers' motion was that a thousand dollars be allotted to uh spaces for their grant and aid application.

Um, all those, and it's got a mover and a seconder, and they both spoke.

Uh, all those in favor of councilor Rogers' motions for a thousand.

Councilor McKenzie, Councilor Matson, Councilor Rogers, anybody else in favor?

All those opposed.

Uh, so the motion does not pass for a thousand dollars.

Is there anybody willing to move a subsequent motion?

I move five thousand dollars um enough to cover the event without catering.

Okay.

Five thousand dollars.

Do you have a seconder?

Counselor Qualit is a seconder.

Um do you want to motivate Councillor Lemon?

I like I I think I've covered the base the the my basis.

Um I I think that uh you've certain you sir made some very good points about how it how this will give um will profile Bure oil and it'll it'll bring people to our community.

And we just we just joined Destination Victoria, so you know, this could be a starting.

By the way.

And um I I think it's probably very likely an underserved community.

I hope that in future um as if they do this again and they need funds that they they go beyond Vure Royal and go out and and uh get funds.

But I think it's a worthwhile event.

I think that it's a community that very likely, as one one speaker said, very seldom gets together.

Um and there is great benefit in that as there is with any condition.

And uh so I, you know, I I'm I'm very comfortable with supporting it to the tune of five thousand dollars.

That is that should cover everything they need, minus catering.

We just we don't do catering here.

Thank you.

Counselor Qualit.

Yeah, grants and aid have flexibility built into them.

That's that's part of the definition of grants and aids for municipal governments, and they need to align with uh local, provincial, and national interests.

There, it's a very broad, broad terms that we need to adhere by.

Uh we host the Victoria General Hospital in our area.

This is a medical-related um endeavor.

Um it would moderately stimulate the economy.

I would be okay with five uh with a caveat uh on a one-time basis because uh we've seen over the past uh what happens is these become reliant on us and then it's a really challenging uh breakup.

I need to add that on.

So that that would be my stipulation, counselor lemon.

Um I'm adding that okay to my original motion now.

Thank you.

I I would also suggest for another condition on that that it be held in View Royal as they requested, because if they get the money and then decide to have it downtown or whatever, that would break it.

So if you're happy to add that condition, I'd be happy to support it.

Another condition added.

Uh councilor Mackenzie.

Just wanted to clarify something.

So I believe of the six thousand seven hundred and twenty-one dollars they're requesting, five thousand and eight, eight, five thousand eight hundred is catering.

So um I'm looking at the table on page three at the bottom of their original submission, uh Council McKenzie.

Page 13, if I may.

Um snacks and drinks for the do to for enjoyment during the documentary viewing twelve hundred dollars.

Council, as I mentioned, there was a revised budget provided on page 51 of 106 showing uh five thousand eight hundred dollars for catering your worship council crowd uh i'm not even sure if this is doable but one more rider i can add it uh the caterer must shall be from bureau do I get a comment we'll find out okay we got a mover and a second room.

We've got we have conditions three conditions.

We have some comments too so so i mean, sort of three things.

One of them, Island health has a budget of four point eight billion dollars.

And they can afford this much more easily than the town.

Two, the physicians related to this program, the people who had listed obviously make an enormous amount of money.

And they could help fund this initiative.

Three, it's our taxpayers' money, and I just don't think the sufficient, you know, part of the things we say the project should be related to and help to view rural residents.

And I'm sure there's some rural residents, but but the majority of people that this relates to uh certainly for treatment in the hospital aren't buy all residents.

So for that reason, I'm not gonna support this initiative with the three usions I just mentioned.

And five thousand dollars again is a lot of money for uh for food that I don't think our resident should be paying for.

Thank you.

Council Rogers.

Yes, I'll just point out that the catering company uh uh is based in Esquamo.

So they'll have to go back to the drawing board with whatever amount they get.

Any other comments, questions?

We've got a mover and a seconder, and that was for five thousand dollars for specific grant and aid.

All those in favor, all those opposed.

So it's split again, kind of the same way.

The motion does pass for five thousand dollars with conditions.

Uh Elna, did you get all the conditions there?

Thank you.

Um so now we move to the second request for a grant and aid.

Is there anybody willing to make a motion on that?

Council Lemon.

I happily um make a motion to I move that we grant them the full amount of fifteen hundred dollars.

Anybody uh or actually I'll ask you to move it or uh provide some motivation, Councilor Lemon.

Council Brown.

It's not a large amount, but it's for a very important and understated and and secret and you know for for women it's it's a private and embarrassing um situation women at all ages find themselves potentially find themselves at and for people who are um marginalized who are perhaps you know living living rough or certainly you know living hand to mouth uh the basic sanitary expenses can be overwhelming and uh you know this is this is a matter of dignity.

Um it will help a few, it certainly won't help all.

Um but I I think that it's simply the right thing to do.

Thank you, Councilor Bratt.

Yeah, well said by Councillor Lemon.

It's a worthwhile endeavor and it isn't a ton of money.

And I think it's uh yeah basically an over I I'd like to toss a condition if you guys are willing to do that.

They I was we asked the question are there any organizations in V Royal that you work with?

And um maybe they didn't know about it, but your place just opened up 20 beds for women uh in the winter.

So I would like to make this conditional that they work with your place or our place or your place our place to uh to um see what they can do to uh help support the uh women going through recovery there if you're amenable to that.

Certainly amenable to that.

Um I I would imagine once in there women's expenses are largely taken care of.

Um but if you say they're not, they're not.

Um so yes, certainly.

There is a a local organization that um is uh led by Katie uh is one of the organizers who uh collects from the community and delivers uh welcome baskets um uh for uh for Christmas and then for the new cycles of folks that are gone through.

Councilor Brown, did you want an opportunity to motivate?

No.

Okay, Councilor uh Matson, yeah.

You know, again, our grants and aid are for majority are for residents, the help residents of View Royal.

This is outside of View Royal.

And we on a regular basis, take a grant somebody makes a request for a thousand or and and we drop it down and and they're far more related to View Royal than this is.

Charities, people want to if our taxpayers, again this taxpayers' money, and if our taxpayers want to provide fund funds to charities, they can do that.

I don't think that's the town's business to be funding every charity who who comes to us and asks for funds, especially if they're outside of View Royal.

So I I can't support this again for just for that reason.

Great initiative, but it's not for the V Roll taxpayers to be paying for.

Counselor.

Do you okay?

Yeah, go ahead.

Staff, when um, you know, when we receive uh grant applications and um, you know, they do indicate that they have grants from other communities, do we s ask them to specify what other communities they've received grant or asking grants from or received grants from the in terms of funding through the mayor, um we do ask that they s they disclose uh funding through permissive exemptions, um but in terms of uh their uh submissions, specifically who they receive grants from, that doesn't seem to be part of the policy, but their their financials are requested as part of the application process to see the level of grant funding they would get thank you um uh members i i think that's something that we should be uh specifying uh so with that we have a a much better understanding what other um you know where what the their other grant sources are um uh so that we can see how much they're asking of you will in proportion to what they got from oh I don't know rich municipalities like um victoria and sandwich um so that would help guide us in in terms of uh the amounts that we uh we are considering um you know I agree that um this is a worthwhile program.

I agree that um we have uh in residents that are probably making use of this program even though they're downtown.

But um right off the bat, 1500.

No, there I have not had strong enough justification that this in relation to all the other grants that they've applied to and and receiving are um proportionate to what's being requested here.

Without any information, I cannot support the full amount.

Thank you.

Any other comments or questions?

Okay, we got a mover and a seconder for uh this grant made.

All those in favor.

Any opposed.

Noting that councillor Mattson and Councillor Rogers are opposed.

The motion passes.

Appointments, yes.

So their first appointment is uh the uh uh to rescind the previous appointment of our former um and for bylaw enforcement officer Brad Cameron.

We thank him for his service, and that we are appointing Robert uh Carey be appointed the bylaw enforcement officer and business licensed inspector for the town of View Royal.

Um staff just got a mover, secondary, uh and then asked that uh Robert be present, but if Robert's undergoing some uh surgery, I believe, and uh the next cycle for our council of the whole, he'll be here so we get to recognize him before he gives you a ticket, um, which is always good to know.

So I got a mover and a seconder.

All those uh in favor of approving staff recommendation.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

Thank you.

Um, and for correspondence, I think the staff has provided a sheet for us to refer to.

On B.

Yeah, so we're we're gonna chat on all of them if we want to, so let's go through them one by one.

Who's actually made a recommendation on A.

UK Seconder for that.

Seconded by Councillor Matson.

All those in favor.

Any opposed, none opposed motion carries.

Um counselor Mattson, did you wanna speak to your email from uh as staff pointed out at our last meeting?

As we um for the Western Western Gateway, we still have to decide how high the buildings are gonna be, what the uses are going to be, and a number of other things.

So there's a lot of decisions we have to make.

And the purpose of my note was to show this is the type of information that could be made available to us.

And I think we need that sort of information to make intelligent informed decisions on our OCP.

And so if I have a motion is that it would be that staff provide us this type of information for the OC for our discussions on the OCP as well as sending the letter off to the um the uh staff motion to add um that that be referred back to council when it comes time for i'm just trying to word what your will is oh that this type of information that dug provided this type of information be provided to council for their discussions on the OCP so this be added added to discussion on the weight western gateway yeah in specific button gateway and and more that this is the type of information required or that council would prefer.

As usual.

Finds useful type of information.

Council finds valuable.

Requires.

I think probably valuable or requires.

I'm not trying to wordsmith for you.

It's your motion.

You can do what you want.

So requires.

So I've got uh so refer to the OCP advisory uh committee number one, number two, that it's added to discussions on the Western Gateway.

Uh uh that this type of information council find uh council requires.

That is your motion.

And you've got a seconder, we've got a seconder seconded by counselor brown, all those in or favored?

No, okay.

Unless there's any comments or questions.

Yeah go ahead yeah um i agree um this is uh a very useful document to you know uh analyze the properties that are are um in and but this is not the only portion correct the western um gateway is north to the fetus interchange so while this has been very useful to have um from the parson bridge six mile bridge um west to colwood um there's a whole portion of of uh land and properties um that uh the equivalent analysis uh it would uh benefit council so i i don't want to um limit uh this this uh perspective and this analysis just to the portion we see on in the document but it should be ext uh extended all the way to the thetus interchange.

Uh that's one point see just for clarification though my intent of the motion is that this type of information be provided for the whole Western Gateway so that we fully understand what the potential development is for these properties and that from that information we can make decisions on heights uh usages yeah.

But without and without it, we we can't.

Well, true.

And uh if that's your intent, we probably need to modify your motion, Councillor Matson's thing.

Added to discussion uh for the full Western gateway.

Right?

So that that that would meet your intent if that satisfies yourself and Councillor Brown.

Um, you know, again, worthwhile helpful information, but um there are extenuating circumstances that um you know it's not just the size, you know, when you look at the the map um on on the first page, uh we see the properties that are south of Island Highway.

Um I don't think there's any particular problem or issue.

Those properties that are north of Island Highway, um, I think it's you know the upside, um, they're constrained by um you know very s precarious cliffs.

So the um uh the geological component of of um uh let's see let's give you 1637 for example.

The geological component is this is glacial till.

So um when when um and in talking to a developer um on this, um he gave an example where in Callwood uh, you know, uh it's the issues of development um because of stream setbacks and and compositions um of of um you know, the the landscape and so on, um, they've gone from a hundred units to fifty.

I don't think we're talking about details here.

We're talking about uh this type of information.

I'm saying that I'm saying that it's um it's really useful to have this information, but we also have to um balance that and include with that uh the technical geological uh assessments, even tsunami impacts, um, so that we can get a full understanding of what really can be um in terms of densification could be uh considered in the OCP.

Yeah, thank you.

Uh any other questions?

So Councillor McKenzie.

I would just, if it's possible to ask staff for their opinion on the fee, because what we're what councillor uh Mattson is requesting is that essentially staff do this kind of work for the whole um Western Corridor.

So I'm just curious whether this is something feasible for staff to do and what their thoughts are on it.

Um it's it's hard for staff to comment.

I mean um this is there's good information in here, but the notice uh the motion sort of came on the fly.

So we'd probably have to talk about it as a staff group and and see what would be required.

Um we were expecting this to be referred to the OCP advisory committee and more thought be put into it, so might be premature to answer tonight.

Uh we do have our acting director of development services here.

Um he may be so bold as to answer, but um I I wouldn't mind uh having a moment to chat with him tomorrow about the implications.

Sterling, do you want to go out on go out on a limb and speak to it now?

Or do you want some time to digest?

Uh Mayor Tobias, I believe it's better for uh Scott and I to have a conversation and uh give uh more of a conversation to this and come back to council with uh with what this looks like.

Thanks.

And my only other comment would be if a member of the public can put this together in a couple of days, I have every confidence that our staff with all the information that they currently have could do the other half of the corridor fairly easily.

Thank you.

Um, so what I'm hearing from staff is a request to refer to staff.

So I I think we can if you wanted Councilor Madison to add that, or but the motion as it is, it's your it's your will to do.

But if you want to add refer to staff with your motion, uh it'll still go to the OCP advisory committee.

We can still make the statement that hey, this is valuable to us, but we refer it to staff as well because what we're asking is that staff do the entire area for the Western Gateway, similar to this type of information.

Oh, the motion.

So if we make the motion as it's currently written, it'll go to staff anyway.

Okay, or I could simply if we can add on there, leave the motion as it is, and we send it to staff for comment.

Or to look at the kind of yeah just refer to staff, but with everything there and just the final part of the motion would be to refer to staff.

Yeah.

I think you said uh counselor brown if you're happy with that.

I already seconded it.

Okay, any other comments or questions?

Uh seeing none uh so the motion specifically is that it be referred uh the email from councillor Mattson, including the work uh by Doug on the Western Gateway OCP housing and population projections, be referred to the OCP advisory committee, um added to discussions in future Western Gateway uh gateway um uh OCP deliberations and the type of information council um council requires, and that we're gonna refer that to staff.

Well, whatever that we've defined the Western Gateway as.

Um, and I think that brings us down to yeah, the the interchange.

Uh so that's the motion.

We've got a mover in a second to all those in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed motion carries.

Thanks, folks.

And the last one just for can I just ask for clarification?

That means that when we have discussions on the Western corridor, we will have that information available.

We're asking staff to do that, yes.

Yes, okay, thank you.

And that passed.

So the last uh number or of correspondence is uh request from Superintendent Preston on the annual request for West Shore Detachment Community Initiatives and Fraising.

Um they're considering a fundraising grant and aid for uh 10,592.

Just a question.

Did is this something that we've given to the RCMP in the past or not?

We have consistently given this to the RCMP in the past.

Um the number is rising every year, as it does.

And uh our apologies, this letter apparently was mailed to us in January, and somehow um didn't make it on the agenda.

So we received an email reminding us uh late last week.

Right.

And has it come out of our grant and aid as uh as a request?

I guess can't remember seeing that in the box.

Yes, it has.

Okay.

Okay, thanks.

Counselor Brown.

Yeah, they make a motion that we approve the funding as requested by Superintendent Preston.

And I can give uh after I have a chance.

Yeah.

Uh seconded by Councilor Matson.

Go ahead with your motivation, Councilor Brown.

As a 32-year veteran police officer, and I'm sure Councillor Cole, which can uh affirm this too.

There's many, many times when the uh support um for mental um uh situations that happen, uh it's not that easy to get um immediate support and and support from people that you that you trust because they're it's it's coming from within.

Um I I'm not gonna go into a bunch of war stories.

I can give you lots of war stories where I was in dangerous situations where I could have been shot or killed, and I didn't get the support from the RCMP, maybe from e division, maybe from division, subdivision you might get, but this is really important.

Not only that, it's got the physical and mental well-being too, because it provides other services and also the um the crime prevention and the community services that's provided within this grant as well.

Um it you know, we talk we've talked about school lease and officers, they aren't exactly that, but it it provides a positive thing for students, particularly young students, to have that um contact with the police officers and and staff.

I think um, and we've done it before, and I know the uh the the constables and staff, sports staff I've spoken to certainly appreciate it.

And uh uh it's just something I I wish it's years, it should have happened years ago.

Anyway, that's my point, and I support it 100%.

Okay, Councilor Matson, anything to add?

Uh any other comments?

Questions?

Those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

That completes our correspondence.

And I believe that brings us down to the consent agenda.

Um thank you.

No, that's that's consent uh that's a consent agenda.

This is the we're still on nine here.

We're done nine now.

Uh now we're down to consent agenda.

So just to be clear with the consent agenda, we'll put a motion to approve the consent agenda with a mover and a seconder.

With that, we are pulling out uh number B, which will become 11B, and number D, which will become 11A.

So everything that we're voting on right now includes all of that except um B and D.

I'm gonna consent agenda move consent agenda seconded by counselor rogers all those in favor any opposed seeing none opposed so this is the new you won't see this on your agenda but this is 11 uh new 11a which is an email dated the 30th uh of june from a roberts on high truck volume on view royal avenue and over to you counselor lemon um yes i i i have a couple of questions for staff regarding this.

Um staff when we have a large new project going in.

Is there is there a conversation with uh with the proponent or the contractors that their trucks are to stay on island highway or and and not rat run into neighborhoods.

Yeah Mary Tobias it it depends on the project.

We never like to assume that that builders will intentionally shortcut um given traffic it could happen.

So we treat this the same way as any other bylaw if we do see it happen we let them know uh and that's should it continue happening, then we would accelerate to the enforcement of that, which would be uh notifying the RCMP.

For the question.

Um, given that there are no large projects going on within the vicinity of Veroyal Avenue, like in the neighborhood.

And there's a a 20 kilometer per hour speed limit at one corner.

It's a I mean, it's it's silly to use it, really, if you're a big truck.

Possible.

Do we have such a thing as uh signs for weight loads?

And can we?

Uh yeah.

So, Mayor Tobias, the truck route bylaw stipulates um that no vehicle over with a gross vehicle weigh over 20,000 kilograms be allowed on any street in a town other than a designated truck route, which is quite literally the island highway.

Um, and just looking the map here, uh six-mile road, those are the only two roads.

There are some exceptions though in terms of one whether or not uh they're doing delivery and deliveries they're allowed to use the roadways and two is uh basically um is used for the person is driving towards a location where there's no alternate route those are the two it's really difficult to prove that right now and by adding a signs there are signs out there especially on the highways that says you know there's like a no truck with GBW 20,000 and I don't know if we have the staffing to sit there and take a look it's basically complaint based and again going towards uh RCMP to enforce so so really it falls to witnesses who see a truck speeding and running running a stop sign to take the license number and report it.

Uh yeah, that's a that's a bylaw enforcement issue.

Um we typically have no ability to enforce moving vehicle violations.

So by definition of a vehicle that doesn't stop um would be an RCMP issue, um, as is speeding.

So take the license number and report it to bylaw because it's breaking, because it's outside of the designated routes.

If a vehicle is speeding or not stopping, people should report that directly to the RCMP.

We have one byla officer for a population of over 14,000 people.

And uh we make full use of that enforcing our our town bylaws.

Can I speak?

Yeah, it's much simpler.

The trucks are going to the building beside four mile.

So is it can isn't just a simple matter of contacting the contractor and say, look, you're supposed to use Island Highway.

Please ask your drivers to just use Island Highway and not work your way through the community.

Are we sure that that's where the drivers of those trucks are coming from?

Is that the direction they're heading in?

There's lots of construction being done, Councilor Mattson.

So I we just need to be sure or or do a blanket thing about which which trucks they are.

Yeah, but there's also a lot of trucks, a lot more than the work that the town's doing.

And I guess all I'm asking is can't we just simply contact the developer and ask him to ask his truck drivers not to use View Royal Avenue.

It should be a simple matter of just asking them very nicely and then they can pass that message on to their drivers.

Ivan, did you have Mary Tobias we can we can certainly if it's counsel direction we can forward counselors message to to the developer there.

We can also do it to some other nearby developments that are basically complete but just because it's in the area and we're not singling out one particular developer, it may be a good message to give none required uh and and you know uh uh probably with um all the development that we've had we've seen a lot of construction vehicles trucks parking associated with uh with construction and uh and I think this is probably a good way to proactively do it but it's it's also if you're a big truck and trying to make money and and things are tight they might try to take an alternative route and they're unless we specifically say they can't they do they go buy my place all the time.

And uh it's um they're making money trying to do it.

They're not trying to break the law or do anything wrong either, right?

Um it's just uh some of the roads and some of the speeds they're traveling is are aren't conducive.

So uh so we don't need a motion for that.

We also don't need to belabor it if staff is going to take this on.

Uh and it might be something that we could incorporate in all new developments that just you know it's just a clause uh when they go ahead and and do it and say please stick to these routes.

Um but not all of our construction is done on just those routes, right?

Um but there's other ways to go.

Ivan.

Mayor Tobias, we already have that clause in all our permits.

Perfect.

Thank you, sir.

Uh so uh happy with the action, staff will take that on with no other question.

Councilor Lemony is satisfied.

Okay.

And uh we'll go to you, Councillor Rogers, next on um Greater Victoria, the joining letter.

Yes, thank you.

Um Warner's the CAO at uh EO from the Destination Greater Victoria.

Again, thanks to V Royal Um for joining.

Um and uh he's also asked for a representative from V Royal to um uh contribute to the Destination Greater Victoria Transportation, Destination Management Committee.

And uh I could find no uh better person, Councilor Rogers, than you to represent the town of V Royal for um Destination Greater Victoria if I could find a seconder.

Second by Councilor Madison, unless anybody else wants the position.

All those in favor of supporting uh counselor rogers to assume the position of uh V Royal Representative for Destination of Greater Victoria.

And um Ellen, maybe we'll we'll put this on our list of secondaries to uh to have that comes up every November or whatever.

Counselor Matson had a point.

So no, that was a lot of fun, but I'm just wondering if we should ask them whether they want to who a council or or whoever they want on there.

Oh, yeah, yeah.