Council Meeting

Good evening, View Royal.

I'll call the uh council meeting for Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024 to order and begin with a territorial acknowledgement that we recognize the Laquanguin speaking people known today as the Esquimalt Nation and the Songhees Nation and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.

This evening we'll hear from the public who telephone in and are present here during the public participation and the question period portions of the agenda.

If you wish to provide comments by telephone, call 778-402-9227.

And when prompted, enter conference ID 761-559-14.

You will be immediately uh muted once submitted to the meeting.

Please do not unmute until you're asked.

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

Finally, I'll ask you to unmute yourself by pressing star six.

To begin, please indicate your name and address for the record.

Speakers will have five minutes each to speak during the public participation and two minutes uh to ask a question during question period, and 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 have an approval of the agenda or motion to approve the agenda, please?

Moved by Councillor Brown.

Seconded by Councilor Mattson.

All those in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries unanimously.

Can I get a motion to adopt the council meeting minutes, the public hearing meeting minutes on June 18th, and the minutes of special council meeting held on June 11th, please?

Second.

Moved by Councillor Rogers, seconded by Councilor Lemon.

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

Just have a brief mayor's report and uh want to thank all the volunteers uh who came out for Canada Day and all of uh my colleagues who joined me, including and especially Sarah, who volunteered her time at uh at the front.

Um I I I think we actually had a better event than Sanjay did because I walked across the bridge afterwards.

They mainly had some vendors and booths, but I think we had a lot more going on uh throughout the day.

So uh I know it's a lot of work and I really want to uh thank everybody who organized it and participated in it, including all the volunteers that were there.

Also wanted to give a shout out to Ivan.

Uh whilst there, I heard uh glowing repart uh remarks about the roundabout, not only the finished product, but people were very impressed that in the process of the build, the contractor cleaned up uh every day.

Uh there was uh um uh not lengthy delays to get through even during construction so ivan if you could pass that on to the contractor as well um i i heard at least four reports from people that live in that neighborhood that were really impressed on not only the finished product but the the process as well so thank you and delegations I'll just confirm uh Sarah we've got none this evening and that moves us into our one and only public participation period so if anybody wanted to address council on uh any matter relating to the agenda, then you have five minutes to uh do so.

Thank you Mayor and council, thank you for hearing me tonight.

Uh Jeff Miller, 2446 Parkeridge Place, and I'm speaking to item 8.1.

First off, I'd like to thank staff for the recommendation in the report.

I'm sure once council has a chance to read it and review this, you will approve it.

I think it will you'll see the town will see an increase in the participation from the residents.

Um but to assist the pilot program, both Miss Miller and Miss Austin have suggested a working group of residents and staff be formed.

Uh this group will be very valuable because they are already in communication with other wildlife groups.

Um education, in fact.

Uh, in fact, Ms.

Miller already went to the CRD board and got a recommendation that they would work on a model bylaw on attractive for the entire CRD.

But regrettably, there's been no positive indication from View Royal staff that such group will be formed.

And again, communication on in such matters of a pilot program of this is of utmost importance.

And I believe Councilor Rogers back in March 19th was suggesting that we have to have public participation in order to do this.

And so this is part of the reason why you get me tonight rather than either Miss Miller or Miss Austin, because neither one of them knew that this report was coming to council.

So when you're not going to inform key individuals that this is coming and they want to participate, then you're not going to get participation.

So it also, you know, makes it hard to this to implement this program because the neighborhood doesn't feel engaged.

You look like you're letting a program the town wants to go solo on, so be it.

Uh that is one way of doing it.

Uh I've seen in other locations it sometimes works, but in more times than not it doesn't work.

And so I would feel that a cooperative and mutually beneficial approach would be contributing to the success of this program.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And I think that uh provides a great segue to go into our Bear Safe uh pilot uh uh project funding options and that is 8.1.

Sarah.

Oh, yes, I need to go to people on the phone if there are any out there, Carl.

Mayor Tobias, we have one caller, last four digits six seven zero nine.

Thank you, Carl.

Uh caller with the last four digits of 6079, was it?

60, sorry, 6709.

6709.

Can you press uh uh star six to unmute yourself, please, and start by uh telling us your name and what street you live.

Good evening.

My name is uh Mafalda Diorio and I live on uh 29 Toby Crescent.

Uh want to say, excuse me for my harsh voice.

I came down with COVID, so I'm a little ill today.

Um I wanted to comment on uh application in the correspondence section of tonight's agenda.

Um we have made an uh application to appeal a decision to cut down a pine tree located on our property.

I wanted to reiterate again the recommendation in the Arborist report that they did recommend at the time to cut down this tree.

Also, I want to add some more information that we did submit by email but did not make it onto the agenda.

We wanted to add to our appeal letter that we are considering replacing the entire driveway, which is a considerable investment to our property.

However, there's no point in doing so until the tree can be removed.

If the tree isn't removed, any any further repairs or replacement we would be um any further repairs or replacement we would make would be just a total waste of time and money as inevitably the damage will reoccur.

So I just wanted mayor and council to consider that as well.

Thank you.

Thank you for the extra information on that item.

Carl are there any other callers?

Mayor Tobias we have no other callers at this time.

Thanks Carl.

Now we can move to 8.1 I guess this is over to you Ivan Okay Mayor Tobias I've been Leon Director of Engineering.

I have before you a staff report on um revised funding options for the various city spin pilot project.

Council recall um that direction was given the staff to provide a $5,000 pilot pilot project allocated to the 2024 financial plan to purchase bearproof residential garbage and food scrap bins to be made on a first come first serve basis, as well as making amendments to several bylaws, creation of policies to educate uh residents on ways to mitigate barrier safe attractance.

Um during the June 4th, 2024 regular council meeting question period, members of the public within the Riverside neighborhood expressed concern about this cost sharing about how much it would cost for um uh opting into this program.

Uh the council recall that in order to maximize the number of bins to effectively cover the uh perimeter of the riverside neighborhood more bins would need to be purchased than the five thousand dollars provided five thousand dollars are strictly for uh purchase of bins no uh other further engagement or no other um ability to hire to consider bylaw amendments that's off all off the side of the table of our staff so uh that five thousand dollars was meant to be the base and then um it costs an overall around eighty eight hundred dollars to cover the the area with if you look at the perimeter, one every two houses will be covered uh potentially, should they opt in.

With the that is with the cost share, but if council um would believe that the right to course of action is to uh work with staff recommendation to make it free for all residents who wish to participate, then that would go the deficit would be about $3,800.

Uh staff believes that it may be able to be covered in our existing budget, depending on how many replacement totes are required this year.

Hard to say at this point.

I just did check the numbers, and uh we don't usually get the invoice bill from uh waste management until the end of the year, but I did check the number of totes that have requested for replacements, and it's I think it's like under 20, so it's not too much.

We're halfway through the year.

So, you know, assuming a linear extrapolation, it may be maybe possible.

But that said, uh staff believe that that is the recommended course of action to obtain better participation into this bear safe bin pilot program.

Uh the pilot the the staff reports in front of you are happy to take questions.

The staff recommendation is that council directs staff to fund 100% of the cost of the bear safe bins to maximize bear-safe bin coverage within Riverside Neighborhood, funded through garbage collection user fees.

Uh that council require residents to return the bins to the town should a resident move away from Riverside neighborhood, and to direct staff to monitor bin replacement quantities throughout the year to confirm if any budgeting adjustments are required.

Uh happy to take questions.

Thank you, Mayor Tobias.

Thank you.

I'll lead off with a question before I go to my colleagues, Ivan, if you wouldn't mind.

Uh, and and maybe this would go to Scott too, because he lived in in true bear country.

Um, are there grants that potentially are available to uh cover um you know uh decreasing attractance to uh bears or wildlife in general that we might be able to pursue?

Uh thank you, Mayor Tobias.

In my experience, I've not come across any grants um for such a program.

Um there are groups out there that can assist with public education, um bear aware status, things like that, but uh nothing as far as uh increasing the supply of of uh bear proof cans.

Thank you.

And uh uh just an another question out there.

Um you mentioned waste management.

Are they supplying the bins for us, Ivan, or uh are we ordering those on our own?

Uh Mayor Tobias, they are supplied by waste management.

It was quite a journey, I must say, to find bins because there was only one supplier that had a low enough quota of purchase.

Most would say you need to purchase 100 bins, which has put us like four times over the budget.

So this is where we're at.

The bins are slightly different, but able to be carried through waste management's um lift system.

So uh quite a bit of engagement is required from waste management to make sure that it was feasible.

Uh and that's how we came across the bins and the costs.

And uh waste management's been consulted, and they're okay with uh the dog downs and everything that that would be uh normal, just procedure might slow them up a little bit.

Uh that is correct.

Procedure wins slow them down provided that residents unlatch the bins before they send them out the curbside.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ivan.

Anybody else uh questions?

I'll go to uh Council Lemon, then Councillor Rogers.

Just to just to clarify, Ivan, uh there's no financial buy-in required residents anymore.

But in order to participate, they they do need to come to town hall and pick up the bins and return their other their their old bins.

That is correct.

So um we're trying to be absolutely fair to all residents.

Some may be watching right now and maybe maybe emailing me right after this council meeting.

Um but we have a process and we've already prepped letters to send out to everyone regarding direction on how to opt in.

And waste management is also on the ready to deliver and to collect the old bins.

Good.

Thank you.

Council Rogers, please.

Yeah, thank you.

Through Mayor Tobias, none so far.

Okay.

It it in fact is probably better that way because those that would have paid in and realize it's free would have kind of caused a little bit of an issue.

So we decided to hold off and wait till we get direction from council.

I would imagine this should be good also a good opportunity to with each bin give uh a pamphlet on um the bear smart um uh guidelines, recommendations, you know, take the garbage out um one or two hours before pickup, things like that.

Uh yes, Mayor Tobias, we'll be actually uh probably providing some sort of paper agreement that they have to sign that says that uh you shall do this and that uh to mitigate bear attractance, etc.

Yeah, this is um uh very timely.

I uh uh CRD um put on a uh uh bear awareness uh smart program uh for three hours uh at the Sardi uh for those that volunteers that walk along trails and do cleanup alone.

And what do you do?

Um the the takeaway is that a grizzly bear will maul you, a black bear will eat you.

So that was very interesting to hear that.

And I bought my first bear spray kit, so there we are.

Um curiously, at uh when we canada day, I uh folks told me about uh bear sightings on Norwood and Gull Road.

So they are getting around, and it's it's really excellent timing that we're going to do this pilot.

So thank you for sticking with it and helping us out.

Council McKenzie.

Thanks.

Can I clarify something that you said?

Um, with the 8,800, so the full amount, uh, it would be one of every two houses in that in that last image with the red perimeter.

Is that what you said?

Uh yeah, thank you, Constable McKenzie.

Good question.

Uh, through Mayor Tobias.

If you look in the the very back of the staff report, you'll see a map and then the outline of the it's basically the whole riverside neighborhood.

The outline is red, the inside is yellow.

Uh we have described the red part as priority area because it is right beside Thetis Park.

And so that is on a first come, first serve.

Should there be any bins remaining of the 28, then the next uh pot, the next set of bins would go to the area in yellow.

But at this time we're trying to focus on the area in red, quite simply because they are in direct interface with the forested area.

So is there enough because if they're free, I would imagine that most people would want to take up that offer.

So I suspect we'll have not enough for the demand.

That's maybe hopefully.

Um so then how do we decide who does get one?

Uh yes, so if there is too much demand, we'll only still stick with 28 bins, quite simply because that is all we're funded for.

However, the priority would go to the area in red, which is approximately 55, 56 houses.

It could be a wrong plus or minus, but with 28 bins, if let's say, for example, everyone in the band in red asked for them, we would provide twenty-eight bins on a first come first serve basis in the red area.

And in doing so, you would have a fifty percent coverage because one in every two houses would be covered with bear safe bins.

Okay, thank you.

Councilor Brown.

Any other questions?

Sorry, no question, but I'd like to make a motion to to uh accept the staff recommendation.

Uh option one.

Second.

Uh moved by Councillor Brown, seconded by Councilor Lemon.

Any motivation?

No, just it it makes a lot of sense.

I mean, they're all taxpayers and um having to pay extra made no sense.

So I just think it's a good thing to do.

It's the right thing to do.

And um hopefully next budget year and season we can expand on it.

So particularly in the red zone, if we have more than 28 requesting bins.

Councilor Rogers, then Councilor McKenzie, please.

Thank you, Councillor Lemon.

Yeah, I appreciate the um uh the limited number that we've got.

And I just wonder um perhaps in a second go around those individuals um and in the yellow, uh one possibility would be a 50-50, you know.

Phase two gets fifty uh half uh half paid for, and and uh those individuals still wanted to buy one or um participate in the program, at least they'd have that that incentive.

So an option to consider, and and I have a feeling we'll be buying more bins for the town.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Rogers, Councillor McKenzie.

So my original concern with these bins was that people were going to rely on them too much at like for and not put them away and not follow those uh our bylaws.

So I do think that the agreement, if we can formalize that and have them, you know, sign something, I think that's really important.

And if we can enforce it, I I know we don't want to add work to anyone's plate, but because I think uh the it they really do have to file follow the bylaws as well, otherwise it's it's not gonna have any impact, and it we're not gonna be able to actually measure how the garbage cans themselves are working.

So um yeah, those are just my thoughts.

But I'm in support of option one too.

Thank you, Council McKenzie.

Uh Councillor Matson, did you have a comment?

No, I'm fine with it.

Good work staff.

Thank you.

Uh the only thing that um we didn't cover was probably where this came from and and uh one of our um our only speaker in the house kind of brought it up is that we're kind of a missing a piece with engagement here and it's really all about communications and engagement and both finding out where the bears are and and if they've actually um tried to break in.

And and I think the key is attractance and not just being able to break in.

It's what attracts the bears there, not that they get a meal out of it, but they get a center or whatever.

Um Steven, what what are your thoughts about how we could increase ways to uh uh work with uh the folks, particularly in the in the riverside neighborhood, on um both the policy and the rollout?

Uh Mayor Tobias, it's a good question.

We're consulting right now with uh several bodies.

Um the CRD, so the town is part of the um solid waste mitigation working group.

Uh also uh we've conversed directly with Coast Waste Management Association, which is quite uh they're quite knowledgeable and they're a good resource for us.

Actually, I just had a meeting with them probably two weeks ago.

Uh, so there's a lot of ideas and shared resources that we'd like to bring forward to council first, and then from there we could use council's uh direction and guidance as to how uh should council wish to keep rolling out this program, how they'd like to see it, and we certainly provide some options.

Uh they would require, they do have costs.

Um, as much as I like to say that our staff are very, very efficient and they they do their best in customer service.

Um, the continuation of these kind of projects on the side of our desks can impact our uh actual capital projects and capital works and other council initiatives.

So that is one item that I do want to comment on.

But that said, uh, we'd certainly provide you enough information for you to provide actionable items for us, and we can go from there, whether it be implemented as part of future financial planning, um, and maybe some other options.

Thanks.

Kevin, Simon.

Appreciate it.

Uh so we got a motion on the floor for option one, I think, unless there's other comments.

Uh, all those in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion car uh passes unanimously.

Thank you.

I can't.

And I think we have a draft annual report for year ended December 31st.

And that's from our EA.

And there's staff recommendation uh be received.

Is it is there any presentation associated with this?

Uh Sarah, or is it just uh motion to receipt?

Thank you.

Uh move your seat.

So second.

A time delay there.

Uh so uh counselor Lemon uh moved, uh Council Brown seconded.

Uh if there's any comments or questions, uh Councilor Rogers.

Yes, thank you.

So I understand there's uh uh 14 days uh that wouldn't allow both staff and residents to make a comment on on this.

Uh that's correct, Councilor Rogers.

Okay, great.

Uh if I could just make one quick comment uh on page 14, you got a picture of the lime kiln that was taken about many years ago, 2008.

It no longer looks like that.

And so it probably we'd probably want an up.

If we're going to continue having the lime kiln, we would probably want to have a current picture, not the way it was, it was significantly dismantled due to safety concerns.

So I think we should get a current picture if we're going to have one.

Thank you.

Council Lemon?

I think it's a really great um visual document.

So thank you to staff.

And I've I've observed that um drones have really enhanced, or a drone has really enhanced the photography and some nice overall shots.

I do have one uh one um image that I'm wondering about, and that is the gazebo.

Um I know this is 2023, but if we use this as a marketing tool or promotional tool, um the g the gazebo that we're we we represent that's represented here isn't the gazebo we have today, so um maybe worth considering a swapping out another picture.

No, Council McKenzie, did you have a question or comment as well?

So I think there was some feedback on prep selection of photos just to make sure they're that they're um current.

Is that um can staff hold that in and and adjust as required?

Uh I certainly don't want council to be under the impression that we send out a team of photographers every year.

Um my apologies.

Um it is a 2023 annual report, so perhaps the gazebo uh looked better last year, but um we're doing the best we can with limited resources.

We do have a communications and engagement staff member joining us part-time this year.

And uh we will arm them with a camera and send them out to take current photos, which we can incorporate into next year's annual report.

Good answer.

Uh so we've got a mover and a seconder.

Are there any other comments or questions?

Uh Ron.

Yeah, I just wanted to compliment staff on a very attractive looking document, uh, very informative, and I think it really um speaks well of the town and also of staff for putting together uh a very attractive and very informative document.

So thank you.

Thanks, Councillor Matson.

Uh so I think we're ready.

All those in favor of receipt.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

And I think that brings us down to um correspondence.

And if you could uh look at your staff comments to help you along um with those, uh is uh is a recommended receive, but is receive uh move to receive to second or seconded, seconded by councillor McKenzie.

Uh comments, all those in favor?

Did you want to comment on that one, Councilor Brown?

Yeah, I know we're just receiving it, but uh I think it's a very well written letter.

And some of the points that uh the person the writer put in the letter were points that were brought up by us in our discussions.

So I'm sure especially the generic section, the uh that one, and also you know, taking out that um the council has some say in whether the noise is disturbing, right?

That's kind of yeah, I agree with the writer on that.

But yeah, I'll be supporting receiving.

Thank you, Councillor Brown.

Any other comments?

Uh the the only thing I I note it, I know it's a letter from a resident, and can because there was no address on it, can we confirm that the resident was in view royal?

We can okay, thank you.

Um so that's moved to receipt.

I think we've just voted on that.

Yeah, so we'll uh we can go down to we don't think we voted yet.

Okay, um, all those in favor of receipts.

Uh seeing none opposed, motion carries unanimously, and then we've got um the report for the CCBF program from UBCM, so we can apply to the building fund.

Um and the recommendation from staff is that all town's signatories be authorized to execute the agreement.

Um I have a move mover moved by councilor uh Mattson seconded by Councillor Lemon.

Any questions for staff of this?

And just to be clear, Scott, this is an annual thing of uh of renewal.

Um listening to the that's correct, Mayor Tobias.

There's no questions or comments.

Um the motion on the table is to move staff's recommendation that town signatories be authorized to execute the agreement.

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

And it's sponsorship opportunities for the 2024 South Island Powwow.

In 2024, we gave a grant and aid uh fully allocated.

Uh oh, 2024 grant and aid fully allocated.

So $2,500 uh each in 2022 and 2023, and uh just confirming that we have no uh $2,500 left over to contribute to this of the grant and aid, or we do.

Uh we do not have $2,500 left over this year.

Uh in the past, we've uh brought that money from grant and aid, uh, but that fund has been oversubscribed in 2024.

Council Lemon.

I think we should try to find some money from some source.

I think it would be um uncomfortable um and and um unneighborly of us to not participate as we have in previous years.

And um I I don't know how we had an extra 2500 last year but but um yeah in future we'll need to put it put aside 2500 to participate because we need to participate.

I'll second the motion.

Moved and seconded uh council Roger.

Yeah, uh even though um we have we don't uh we've overscribed the grants on aid, we still have casino funds.

So it uh there should be no particular problem to um simply you know dip into that unless staff uh have concerns about using casino funds uh no concerns we'll have to do a budget amendment at some point but uh i'm I'm sure cf o Christiansen will be able to find an appropriate bot of money and and I guess a comment, your worship, um uh we probably should anticipate this every year.

So when we do the grants and aid uh next year, then we should uh um put that as a uh physical note as a continuous carryover.

Would uh the mover and the secretary be happy to roll that into the same motion that we'd approve that this year out of casino funds, and that um we would put a line item into the grants and aid in the future for a sum of 2500.

The mover would.

Secondary would you mean any other comments or questions, concerns about that?

And of course, that that opportunity as well uh is uh an opportunity for all of us uh to participate in in that.

And I think there's two sessions during the day, so it is something to uh really demonstrate our support along with the other municipalities.

Um, all those in favor?

Any opposed none opposed?

Motion carried.

Thank you for that.

And now we are down to item D, which is a tree permit that we did have a speaker uh speaking uh for this, and it is a letter um for Toby Crescent.

Uh staff's recommendation was the homeowner obtain an updated arborist report uh stipulating any changes that may have occurred since 2018 inspection, including tree health and the arborist report to recommend setbacks from the tree and hardscape material to accommodate the healthy tree root system.

Uh Council Brown.

Comments?

Yeah, this uh to me it's uh getting another arborist report to me is a waste of time.

The tree's obviously lifting the driveway up to people want to improve the driveway.

It's also a threat to the neighbors because the way it's leaning, it may fall on it.

Um I've driven by the property before it's a tree is a tree.

Um it can be replaced with another tree, but to me, it's uh getting another arborist report several years later, I don't think it's gonna be anything different.

So um personally I would support a motion to to approve the permit or direct staff to approve the permit.

Councilor McKenzie.

Yeah, I I kind of have a more general comment.

I have for a long time I've heard a lot of people who have trees in their yards that are causing some sort of issue.

There's some concern.

And our bylaw doesn't really distinguish between someone who's tried and is looking for solutions and alternatives and they're they're facing hardships because of a tree versus a developer who just is gonna tear it out.

So I mean I do have a motion at a future date around tree bylaw but I would love if we can distinguish it because I know what it's like to live near a tree that you're afraid of in a windstorm, it's gonna fall on your house.

You're it's not a great way to live.

So um I think we just need to distinguish the two because it's very very different um situations.

So I do yeah, I I agree with uh what Councillor Brown said.

I don't know if an additional arborist report is needed, but how do you apply this consistently for everyone?

Because again, I've heard it many people have the same kind of similar issues.

So Councillor Rhodes.

I uh I see the point of of my colleagues.

Um the the applicant has been very good about sending us uh photos dating back to 2009 and and so on.

And it's um uh certainly I I don't know whether it's the the fault of the developer or whoever, but to put a concrete uh uh uh driveway right up to the trunk uh is not very smart.

And uh it's an interesting point that uh that was made that maybe more malleable um surface like asphalt but I suspect when you see the the lifting uh that's across the driveway would probably have fractured the um uh the asphalt as well and still resulted in some kind of uh tripping hazard.

The interesting thing about this particular thing is very much like um uh on paddock place where um um the property owners have taken issue with the town with us because one of our boulevard trees has um had the same impact of lifting um their driveway and and fracturing it and so forth and causing uh an issue.

And uh um it's our tree, it's our boulevard, and and um and we're we will take no action on that.

Mind you, it's not this the the situation is uh it's not going to be blowing over in the wind or or causing uh distress, as we heard from the residents.

And I guess um it it's always an interesting one where people um move into neighborhoods, they love the trees, and now they uh are afraid that the trees are gonna fall down on them.

So can you have it both ways?

It's um uh it is an interesting problem.

But I I do believe, if I'm not mistaken, staff can help me, but the um when there's a uh a building or sorry, tree removal application, one of the criteria that we list is whether it creates an infrastructure issue, like to foundations and so on.

Maybe uh staff can help us uh on if I'm on the right path.

What's that about?

Uh yeah, Mary Tobias, uh Council Rogers is on the right path there.

It has to do with uh private property damage, uh, especially with respect to like roofs and the actual house itself, foundations, absolutely for sure, storm drains isn't that thing, although there are some ways that they can mitigate it depending on the size of the routes and whether it can be roadrooted.

I won't go into too much details there with respect to the driveway.

Um there are and in my experience, there are ways to move over routes safely.

Um I do agree that maybe the heave is too much, maybe the roots have grown, but it's we don't know the change or the delta from 2018.

It's been five years, and so the purpose of uh uh and a revised report is to ask that fundamental question what has changed in five years and if anything has changed in five years.

Uh administratively this is how we we we deal with this and that if the tree health has degraded from and I'm just looking at the report here the report said that the the pine had um healthy stem girth as well as sound structure 2018.

If it's changed in five years and is going to be a hazard then staff would certainly approve this um this permit.

Yeah, I mean, a lot of you know my driveway is lifted up by a tree.

Uh driveways throughout our community are have you know have have some sort of impact.

Mike, my question is at what point does a driveway damage sufficient to get rid of a tree that's been there for you know a hundred years or so?

Um and maybe that's so so I am I have less concern about driveway damage than I than some of the other things staff had mentioned in terms of roof or worrying about it falling over.

But the fact that it has got a crack in the driveway.

Um, um I I think there should be ways of mitigating against uh uh or or or fixing that without having it to chop down the tree in in general.

But I'm it I'd certainly like staff's comments on on what this needs to be.

It sounds as if we need another Arborist report.

Thank you, Councilor Matson.

Uh yeah, my my thought on this is um I I hear what you're saying about trying to beautify your property and maintain it.

Is it presenting a danger right now, Ivan, that you're aware of to uh health and safety?

Um thank you, Mary Tobias.

So one thing I can think of is um if we go by kind of our sidewalk inspections, which is separate, it's a the sidewalk inspection is public property and not necessarily can be construed to be used for pub for private, but you know, w without a lack with a lack of information on there and on what to consider private property slip trip and fall, we'd go by ours and we we use certain distances, whether it be you know half an inch or an inch.

Uh based on the photos there, certainly it could be uh construed as a as a hazard these days, especially uh as we try to improve active transportation and more people walking.

Um the uh applicant has said that they plan on redoing the driveway, and that may present itself to be an advantageous for both parties in the sense that we could look at ideas such as, okay, well, are we going to pave right up to the to the trunk again?

Um that's probably the main reason why there's a heave, is because the driveway was basically poured right up against the tree trunk.

Or, or you know, maybe 30 years ago when it was poured, a tree was a little smaller.

That said, we're here, we are where we are right now.

Um there's other also other opportunities of looking at more malleable uh surfacing, although we do appreciate um your your knowledge and and your comment about maybe there is too much heave for that to even work either.

So uh that's the whole purpose of the of updating a revised um arborist inspection because they would be able to tell us one uh how far back a setback is required to make sure the tree is safe and healthy, and if it's too onerous, if it if the setbacks taking up three quarters of driveway, we that could be considered a uh grounds of removal.

And the second thing is, is there an option for uh using different hardscape materials to protect the tree roots while also providing more malleable structure?

And if the if the arborist says that that's not the case, it can't happen, then again, that's another uh more grounds for removal uh under the tree protection bylaw.

Uh, we need to make sure that uh private property is uh not damaged and still safe for the for uh for the users.

So that's how we will go about it administratively.

Thank you, uh Ivan.

Uh I'm just looking at uh photograph and the pages aren't numbered, so it's hard to actually tell, but it looks like the section that the pavement is lifted, there's a space for gravel to actually be leveled out there where the gravel is washed away.

So is this an issue of you know, just leveling out the gravel to make it good?

I I'm just really concerned, colleagues, that if we start if the tree is posing no danger to structures or health and safety, and we start ripping these things out, uh, we're setting a dangerous precedent so that we're just encouraging the removal of more trees in our neighborhood.

Uh and the other part that I'm kind of apprehensive is that we're going up against really an operational issue that should be governed by staff.

And I appreciate you know, the the uh the residents are concerned and they have escalated it to us, but to have it escalated and then for us to arbitrarily kind of turn around and and not uh on our staff's recommendation to simply get another arborist in to take a look at it and potential other mitigations they could do we I think we owe it to ourselves to do anything we can to stop yet another tree coming down in the neighborhood.

Counselor Brown.

Yeah and I note in one of the photos there's two very significant trees there and the one tree is significantly leaning to the left and the neighbors already expressed in the letter uh their concern about losing it in the storm and of course because of the condition of the uh well the the looks the what look the condition the way it looks it looks like that could come over also I see quite a few wires in the back I don't know if those are hydro telephone or what kind of wires those are but it looks like the tree could potentially fall on those two.

So um but I agree with you.

Um it is it it should be up to staff, although again, I'm quite confident that the arborist is going to come up with a very similar report.

So to me, we're just delaying to me that we're delaying the inevitable.

Scott.

Uh just further to Councilor Brown's concerns brought up there.

Um page two of the arborist report, about halfway down, notes that the pine tree that the likelihood of failure is possible.

Likelihood of the tree impact impacting a high value target is rated as high.

Likelihood of failure resulting in impact, somewhat likely.

Consequence of the impact rate is as significant.

And the overall risk of the tree to the neighbor is currently rated as moderate.

And that was uh five or six years ago.

The tree was in that condition.

So uh aside from the aesthetics of the tree impacting the driveway, um, there is a tree leaning towards a neighbor's house.

Thank you.

Uh are there two trees in question, Ivan?

Because they've got one part circled and then they've kind of indicated, and is there or is it just one tree?

Uh Mayor Tobias, I believe it's just one tree is the pine tree.

Okay, thank you.

Uh was there another comment, Councillor Rogers?

Uh a question to staff, um they're showing the uh our page 14 uh shows a picture of the lean of the tree.

And I I just wondered is that a current picture?

Is that a picture that the RBIS might have re provided back in because the in the Arbus report of 2018, it speaks of the lean of the tree that was approximately 25 degrees off vertical.

So I wonder if this tree still has uh the same lean that it had back in 2018.

Uh Mayor Tobias, it's on is actually uncertain.

The I mean the the applicant has has detailed the years of when the photos were taken.

Uh this one doesn't.

Uh and if there is a additional lean, then I'm sure that's additional uh if it had an ISA certified operators look at it, um, they could tell us fairly quickly whether or not we should take it down or not fairly quickly.

Okay.

Yeah.

I I I think it's um you know, looking at that picture, one of the things that concerns me is the loss of needles in the tree.

And I think that's a probably a uh pretty good indication of decay um for this tree if that is a modern modern image I think the arbors will probably come to the same conclusion it's it's its lifetime is already hastened from from one reason or another you know significant drought who knows um uh at this moment I'm leaning on removal thank you counselor lemon and councillor Brown um yeah I've been I've I've been waffling on this to save the tree or save the driveway um but but I agree with my colleagues who who see safety as primary concern.

If I if I were a neighbor, given the winds we've had recently and we we have a lot of winds and I I you know it it seems to be in the um they seem to be increasing in intensity and frequency um I would be I would be concerned with a tree that was leaning in my direction.

So um well I I yeah I I I feel that we perhaps need to protect people in the neighborhood and give them some confidence.

Thank you Councillor Lemon Councilor Brown Yeah the green team goes out and removes all that uh English ivy and and this tree is absolutely covered in it so um not only is it leaning um that ivy itself could eventually kill it it's it's it's you know almost up the tree so um I would prefer that staff approve the permit and have the tree remove in fact, I'll make that motion right now that staff uh approved the permit to to remove that tree.

Thanks, Councillor Brown, got a seconder?

Second.

Second by Councillor Rogers.

Um, yeah, I wasn't in favor of actually why it was brought forward the cracking of the driveway.

I've got a gravel driveway and it works just fine with roots.

Um, but is this as uh potentially a public safety uh issue, then that my mind is changed that it should be probably brought down because of that, and it's an ongoing problem.

Um any other comments or thoughts?

Councilor McKenzie.

I uh I'm just wondering and when the appropriate time, I do think it needs to be something that we do consistently and that our bylaw needs to speak to.

So um maybe I'll say yes to this, but then at a future point bring a motion to that effect.

Thank you.

There's no other comments.

There's a motion on the floor to approve the request for the uh permit made by Councillor Brown and seconded.

All those in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing Councilor Mattson is opposed.

Uh so I think that uh brings us down to two more, and that's nine two for information.

Um somebody wants to pull one out, that's fine to discuss.

But move receipt.

Uh move receipt of items A and B seconded by Councillor Rogers.

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed.

I think that brings us down to our bylaws.

Staff, were you gonna speak to these or are we just going to roll them through?

Mayor Tobias.

I had uh a presentation for each uh bylaw, but they they're fairly short, they're just most of a mostly a recap of what was discussed.

Um, if if council wants, I can do a brief presentation, or you can go uh to the bylaw.

Uh thoughts from council.

Did you want the presentations or do we just go to the bylaws?

Go to the bylaws.

Okay.

Um if there's no uh disputing that, uh, then we can go right to the bylaw and the staff recommendation for item 10a1.

Is that the report dated June 24th for the senior plan titled entitled uh delegation of garden suite form and character development permits and development permit renewals be received?

Uh can I get a mover and a second or so moved moved by councillor Lemonin, seconded by Councilor Brown.

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing your opposed?

Yeah.

Uh of receiving it.

Sorry, just to receiving the report.

Yeah.

Yeah, just receiving the report.

And uh number two, the delegation by law eight seven two, a bylaw to amend delegation bylaw to permit the director of development services to be granted delegation powers to approve garden suite development permits.

Mixed residential development permits exclusively for small-scale multi-unit housing up to six units and uh development permit renewals.

And this would be the first, second, and third.

I'll move first to third meeting.

Uh councilor Matson moved first to third.

Have we got a seconder?

Seconded by Councillor Brown.

Um, before we go to motivations, is there any comments or about this?

Because we always had an opportunity for questions.

Yes.

Thank you.

So the uh the previous um information from staff, um, I think had only addressed and talked about garden suites, but it seems like bill uh 1140 is about lockstalking barrel.

Is it is it just still garden suites, or uh is it now that um council is delegating or authorities on everything gardener suites and foreign up to six unit?

Because that's not the way I understood all this.

Maybe staff can help me.

Through through Mayor Tobias, uh to councillor Rogers.

Uh, the report uh provided to council uh highlights what was discussed at the June 11th, 2024 meeting.

And at that meeting, council um or sorry, committee of the whole had considered uh three different options, and what was decided upon was option two.

Option two is what is presented as the uh amendment bylaw, and what was considered uh under option two was that uh former character development permits for garden suites within within the intensive residential garden suite development permit area uh would be delegated to director of development services along with the renewal of an existing valid uh development permit, so uh development permit renewals.

So both those items were uh highlighted in option two, and that was what uh uh staff have uh amended the bylaw to uh to include.

Uh thank you, but I guess I'm I'm still confused by the title of Bill 1140.

It it seems to imply that um uh you know, well, we had that debate, and I'm clearly aware that uh we had only um you know handed the authority to delegated authority to staff on garden suites.

It seems like it's everything here as far as the label the title is concerned.

We can tie that into the motion.

I believe uh Scott, you'll have to work with me on this, but the motion could be to um approve the reading because it's at first to third.

We can amend the title to delegation of garden suite uh form and character renewals.

But that that is the definition that staff had supplied, but it's it is it is not um clear.

No, the and and what worries me is that if the title is not clear, what's with the text?

Where is the text uh is is the text any clearer um for this bylaw?

Through the mayor.

The uh the attachment uh I can see the confusion that uh councillor Rogers, you've you brought up.

So the uh the title does make reference to permits exclusively for small-scale multi-unit housing to up to six units.

Uh that's the second last uh part of the uh the title for the amendment bylaw.

The actual content of the amendment bylaw though does not include that uh that permission for staff.

So it would just be the title that is uh is incorrectly um making reference to uh delegated authority.

So you know, I guess once uh that I guess it goes along with what you're saying, your worship, is that um if we've uh amend the title with the staff's uh uh understanding and correction, then um then that would help so can we amend that at the same time Scott uh we can amend it any time um this evening I would suggest removing from the title the mention of mixed residential development permits exclusively for small scale multi-unit housing up to six units that that that be removed so really we're just talking about bylaw to amend the delegation uh by law to amend the delegation bylaw to permit uh the director of development services to be granted delegation powers to approve carbon garden suite development permits, period.

Correct?

Oh and and developments.

Yeah.

Everybody okay with that?

I'm fine with it.

And so once again, um while the the title and and again the text is talking about um delegated private moving uh approving garden suite development permits, in actual fact, um the whole point was um delegation of garden suites, form and character.

So is form and character um going to be included in the title, and that's again just form and character.

Because there's two parts here.

There's approving the development permit, and but I thought that we'd just approved the form and character at the committee of the whole.

Absolutely.

Yeah.

So they're um so uh just to be clear, the intention is staff will amend the uh text on the description uh of the bylaw to uh just include the garden suite development permits and renewals uh under the form and character, yeah.

Um Scott Uh thank you, Mayor Tobias.

I believe uh Councillor Rogers concerns are addressed under section four A1, where it says conformance to all applicable town of Uroyal OCP plan bylaw policies and objectives and development period development permit area design guidelines.

So I think the form and character will be captured in those uh guidelines.

And of course for staff to uh approve of the permit uh it it would have to conform with those guidelines thank you Scott uh councillor McKenzie I think the way it's phrased here is is clear and reflects what we discussed at the last meeting so I'm afraid that changing it uh might actually not uh be accurate because we did say it was we were approving the renewals for this small development permits when we discussed it.

So that's all included in the properly yeah, it's just worded awkwardly, Councillor McKenzie, that I read it it.

It could be interpreted that we're delegating the development permit renewals or were um the delegation pro powers for approval also apply to mixed residential development permits up to six units.

You can read it both ways.

But I think what we wanted to be clear on was that we're delegating the powers to approve garden suites period and that we're also delegating the renewals for mixed residential development permits, uh, exclusively for small-scale unit housing up to six units.

So I think it could be solved with a period, but it does not be much.

But yeah, we're so to be clear, we're delegating the approval of garden suites, and we're delegating the approval of renewals for uh up to six units in accordance with the SMUH, hate that acronym.

Um, which I'm sure Sterling, you do more by now.

Um so we're we happy with that wording.

I think it just needs a little bit of clarification because it could be interpreted differently.

Okay, so this is to first, second, and third reading.

We've got a mover, we've got a seconder.

Any other comments?

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Noting councilor Rogers is opposed.

Um motion carries lot coverage, impermeable surface coverage, zoning, bylaw amendments.

Over to you, Sterling.

Uh yeah, Mayor Jobias.

I again I had a short presentation for this.

Um if you would we just decided to forego them, didn't we?

Council Rod.

Um, I I think it would be beneficial to hear from staff because um when we had the the previous um um I don't know, I don't know what to call it a public hearing, but we we there was some um process that we had to clarify, and staff were um helpful on in that regard and because we were going to um I just waive public hearing in that process.

So as a part of refresher for for members of council, I think it would be beneficial to hear from staff on this.

Thank you, Council Rogers, Council Lemon.

Also, um there may, well there's nobody in the in the chambers now, there may be people online who would like to know what we're talking about.

Agreed.

Uh go ahead, Sterling with your staff report, please.

Thanks, Mayor Tabas.

So purpose of the report presentation tonight is to introduce zoning bylaw amendment number 1143.

And the intent of this is to remove the existing lot coverage maximum and impermeable surface coverage maximum, which are provisions within the density section of our standard zones within our zoning bylaw.

And the idea is to place them under a new uh heading, and uh the new heading will just be impermeable surface or locked coverage and impermeable surface coverage.

Staff had uh presented this as a inclusion of bylaw amendment number 1135 uh back uh in June, so June 11th.

And what uh staff had heard was that there was maybe concern that the inclusion of this was not uh within the scope of the uh SMA so small-scale multi-unit housing updates.

And the uh the decision uh was to move forward with the amendment, but separated from uh bylaw amendment number 1135.

So, what staff have done uh is that we've come back now with a separate bylaw amendment specifically for the uh the removal of these uh these two definitions within lot density and then putting them in a new uh a new heading.

And um this is largely to keep consistent with the new changes that have been introduced in Schedule E of the zoning bylaw for lot coverage and improve mobile service coverage for SMA, uh just keeping the the entirety of the zoning bylaw uh consistent.

That's that was the intent.

Um this slide just shows that what we have existing versus what would be proposed.

Attached to the uh report tonight is a a red line version of the uh the zoning bylaw.

You'll see in the standard zones uh those effected by SPA, and in addition to the residential are some commercial zones, there are going to be the changes shown from the left to the right.

So what we have on the left is what we have existing, and the right is essentially just adding in a new uh a new title, title heading there.

And um, what will this mean?

Essentially, moving forward, should somebody want to increase the maximum lock coverage or impermeable surface coverage, uh what would be required would be a development variance permit rather than a rezoning application.

Variances still go through council and um they're subject to staff staff uh review uh based on an application, uh development variance permits or development permit with variance, and uh that would come forward for for council's review and consideration.

Staff uh are just this is just a move to receive, and uh following this uh presentation will be an opportunity to uh give uh first, second, and third reading of the bylaw.

And um public hearing was waived for this based on the um direction given by uh committee at the uh June 11th meeting.

Thank you.

Any uh questions for Sterling regarding this?

Straightforward.

Oversee.

I got a um second councillor Metz and uh move receipt seconded by Councilor Rogers.

All those in favor?

Any opposed, seeing none opposed, motion carries.

And I think that brings us down to zoning bylaw 92014 on the same topic uh for first to third.

Um first to third, second, counselor Mattson moves first to third, second by counselor Rogers.

Any questions or comments?

All those in favor?

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed, motion carries.

And I think this now turns Sterling's baton over to Sarah, maybe for the amendments to election procedures by law 989.

Thank you.

It does.

So this is following up on a report that we talked about first in 2023, right after the election, we came forward and reviewed how that went and how that didn't go, and all sorts of things about that.

At that meeting, there was a decision to table an aspect of it primarily around election signs until there was a full body present.

The issue came forward on May uh committee of the whole meeting, and there was a discussion about election signs.

And um from that, these were the items that were discussed whether or not we should eliminate election signs, reduce the number of uh small signs that we had, because as you recall, we have the 10 election sign zones at that time, the challenge with bylaw enforcement around election signs, the effectiveness of them, the environmental impacts primarily of the coral plast and accessibility signs on ministry land, Ministry of Highways, and private land.

Next slide, please.

So there was a council decision made in May, and that is that the bylaws relating to signs, election signs, be amended to remove provision for candidates' election signs on View Royal's public land, and instead we would only seek to have federal, provincial, or local signs that are promoting or announcing upcoming elections on our land.

And this report before you tonight and the res and the bylaw amendments are responding then to this resolution to proceed with those bylaws from that May meeting.

Next slide, please, Carl.

So the bylaw for the election procedures bylaw itself, number 989, is changed.

You'll see a red line version.

This synopsis in the PowerPoint is a little less detailed, but it talks about adding what I've termed a voting opportunity sign, which is what the term would be then for when these agencies, let's say Elections Canada, Elections BC, either the School Board 61 or 62 that are in our jurisdictions or the town itself would then be able to place a large sign on municipal land on town owned land promoting voting opportunities.

So it would be like, you know, election coming on this date, check out www.blah blah for details about voting in your area, whatever the sign messaging would say, or or uh probably not a QR code because you're probably moving too fast to get that, but a but a hashtag or so or something, something similar, whatever the agency would then decide.

So the other amendments remove a small sign uh definition because it's really not required anymore.

Uh it removes the placement of election signs on town public land, it adds a provision for those agencies to place those signs, as I said, on our designated three different designated areas.

And for these, though, it retains some of the provisions that we've already had in our existing bylaw.

And that is you have to put them in safely, don't damage our things, primarily underground works.

They have to be self-supporting structures, so don't attach them to any of our other things or each other.

We talk about depth of your supporting structures again with a view to not damaging our underground works.

So that's primarily what that's about, but that's already in the existing 989 bylaw.

We add in these this bylaw use of the public sec uh public ESB building reader board where staff can add a message that says upcoming provincial election on this date.

Check out www.blah blah for you know information.

So we're able to do that.

And right now that isn't allowed.

I mean, we could do it of the goodness of our heart, but this authorizes it andor permits that to occur if if they so choose to want us to do that, those agencies and ourselves, we would do that anyhow.

We already do.

Um much remains the same though in the provisions.

Um you can't post signs on vehicles and trailers.

The timing is that they go up uh no sooner than 30 days before the last election day, and they have to come down 48 hours afterwards.

So the same provisions would still apply for though those same provisions apply for these agencies as well as for signs on private land, because we don't want them up for months and months in advance and for days and days and weeks afterwards again similarly to sign faces um and again they're also still going to be permitted um on private land and there are safety provisions uh still required whether it's um on private land or these agencies on town land you know you we don't want kites attached to them or inflatables you know the floppy guy uh that you see when you're going down some of those roads we don't want flashing lights or signal, they're not to be distracting, they're not to be too close to the roadway, you have to be a certain distance from a hydrant.

So there are these still still the same rules that would still apply.

Next slide, please.

Uh, for the sign bylaw itself, we're removing the election sign definition.

It's not required.

Um, I don't think it was really when we put it in to begin with, so it isn't required now.

Um, the bylaw doesn't really apply, anyhow, to signs dealing with elections.

As long as they're placed, the provision in this bylaw already is there, and it says as long as they're placed within that 30 day before the voting to four days to 48 hours afterwards time frame.

And so no permits required, there are no requirements for that.

So whether it's um these local agencies doing it or the federal or provincial agency doing it, or people on private land doing it, the same rules still apply.

So that is no different than it was.

Next slide, please.

So I wanted to talk to you about the the voting opportunity sign locations.

I looked at the maps for the 10 sign zones and I thought, well, let's try and spread these out and not have them in too many locations to the best of our ability, keeping in mind that we would use the have the public safety building reader board available.

So east on the north side and on the westerly side.

And I looked to the areas that had a large sign zone and what made the most amount of sense sense to me.

So I looked at uh what was areas, I believe it was one, four, and nine are now areas one, two, and three in this bylaw amendment.

So next slide, please, in more detail.

Area one is right by the overpass before you get to shoreline school.

So it's the same area that it was for the large sign zone area at the in the prior or the current bylaw.

Next slide.

And here we have uh before the roundabout across from Centennial Park.

Next slide.

And the other area is right at Chilco and Six Mile.

Next slide.

And so something that is innovative.

We're also not to create distractions, and so this minimizes those.

And it is uh creating less waste.

For the aspect of time critical, um, there is, and we did talk about this the last time we spoke of this.

There is a provincial election coming up.

This month is the month that we would need to do this so that we can notify elections BC.

We would notify and see if they're interested in doing anything about a voting opportunity sign.

And we would also then be able to, as we hear them candidates, we would be able to notify them right away.

Please note in our municipality, you can use private people's land with consent of owner or occupant, uh but no signs on municipal land.

There may not be.

And next slide, if there are any.

Here we go.

It is that uh the report be received, and we do have the two bylaws on for um consideration of readings.

Thank you.

Sarah uh questions for Sarah.

Uh go with Councilor Lemon then Councillor Rogers, please.

Thank you, Sarah.

Um in looking at your three zones, it seems to me that there's a large swath of Virroil, North Veroil, where residents may actually never have cause to go south, um, who will not be able may not be able to view these boards.

So I'm wondering about the possibility of a fourth zone for, you know, people who don't cross over this way.

We don't read signs in North View Royal.

We don't read signs in North View Royal even if they're put up.

So no no no I'm talking about the voting opportunity.

No I know but I I I I I was kind of I I looked at that as well Jerry I was concerned with but there's no real way to get it.

Right?

You would have to have them everywhere and that kind of defeats the purpose.

I I I know where you're coming from but if we put it north then there's still folks that are coming south there are going to be other folks that work in Langford that um go into Northview Royal as well that aren't going to see the one on six mile or close to six mile.

Yeah.

We would we would be putting up more signs than there probably would have been election signs.

And and is that where people are getting their information from I'm not I'm not debating is there a better place to do it but what I would just suggest is let's start with this and then then learn from it.

Okay.

I disagree.

Um I because I if if for example you lived in Riverside and worked downtown you might never come across here.

Totally you might you know you do your shopping at Eagle Creek and you go downtown and you know yeah what election anyway it's it it it strikes me that there's an area that's stuck.

But but okay, that's one thing.

The other thing is we don't have a full council right now.

Were we not wanting a full council.

I I think we do have a full council.

I don't see counselor coalition.

Damien's um logged in right now or he was, yeah.

Is he?

Yeah.

Oh, okay.

Okay, good.

Okay.

That's that's my comment then.

Thank you.

Yeah, I think that uh counselor McKenzie's in her neighborhood, she's not gonna see that necessarily if she's just going back and forth downtown.

Is and the same with the the the folks in my neighborhood, but you know, where do you where do you stop if you start putting these up?

That's my only concern.

Is that and is that where you're gonna know that there's an election anyway, or is there other means that you're gonna get there?

So go with Councillor Brown and Counselor Roger.

Yeah, well, certainly I agree.

Let's reduce the signs.

I I like the idea of notifying people there's an election coming and actually if we had a sign in the north maybe at Eagleview School which is a voting location at least people would know there's a voting location there and I think that would be a good spot if we you know I don't think there's anything close to Eagleview School in these zones am I wrong no I don't think so Eagleview School is one of the voting polling stations so it'd be nice to have a sign there announcing there's an election and you can vote here you know kind of thing council Mackenzie uh thank you for this.

I think I've only heard positive um comments about our our change or our decision to move this direction.

So I think this is a good start.

I do see it as like a pilot.

It is the first, and we can change it before the municipal uh election too, if we find that there uh we do want to change things.

Um because I do get your point, um, Councillor Lemon.

I think it's only really impacts the municipal elections, possibly, because if people are traveling through, they'll see, you know, uh for the provincial and and the federal.

So um, but yeah, I think we can approve it and and modify it as needed.

Yes.

The um uh I still have significant problems, uh concerns about um this this move and and um speaking to folks at uh Canada, they were saying, yeah, you know, it's just it's really difficult to get people to put signs on their lines.

They're really reticent to do that.

And so I think I take I see Council Lemon's point that Northview O is missing, and I would suggest uh the those that are um driving along um Admirals Admirals are missing.

Um and yes, it would be curious to see what um how the how the province um uh will go through this process.

I think that would be an interesting trial run.

Uh you know, I I I'm sorry, I think having it on the uh fireman's uh the fire halls uh reader board, you're driving past it.

You're not gonna see it.

I'm much that you talk about a distraction.

So, you know, because you're trying to read all that information on the board.

Oh my god, I didn't get the uh uh the website down.

So it's um I consider that a distraction.

Um, the if we uh one of the things that uh when it comes to our time, our election, maybe it would be nice if we um once we had uh gathered the names of uh the candidates, we would post those names in the alpha in the order that they were on the ballot.

So that another way of informing people, not only there's election, I mean you have to be from space if you didn't know there was elections.

Certainly, I think we'll know that there's going to be a provincial one.

But um uh I think we would probably would have um more opportunities um and say assist our public, inform our public as to not only what there's an election, but who?

Who's running?

And so I think that's uh that's a thought.

One of the questions I had in in um you know restricting um uh uh people from not putting signs on town owned property, but we also have a um regulation that people must not put uh place or permit a election sign in any vehicle or any vehicle.

Why not?

Why wouldn't they be able to have their election sign on their vehicle?

It's not on town property.

I think that your question for stuff.

Yeah, yeah.

So that's that's a 9.13.

And I don't think that that's reasonable to have in in this um in this bylaw.

Sarah that was in the bylaw that was already approved and in place.

And I think it stems from places like when you drive around or you're walking around in let's say Vegas where you see people's cars and trailers and they're just poster cars driving around.

I think the idea is to avoid it having that type of approach.

And so it's not an uncommon thing for election signs to not be sp splattered all over people's cars like that in in municipal bylaws.

Well the okay.

So the bylaw is presumption is presuming that the entire car is going to be splattered and that it's going to be large signs.

So I I think they're um that the the that clause overreaches and I think could easily be challenged um uh for being unreasonable um and uh unless we better define um just exactly how much a citizen can place a sign and it's not necessarily the uh the um elector or the the candidate but maybe some resident wants to uh promote their their um their candidate so um I would really recommend and I've a key reason I would uh vote against this is because of 913.

Um, and I and I think um you know while some of may have heard great things about this, I think we went way too far.

You know, we had every opportunity to reduce the the number of signs.

We take away the big ones, reduce it down to five, or two spots.

It was going to be 30 small signs.

It's really both.

I really do hope after this that we do bring this back, and with a sober second thought after the provincial election, because I still think it's unreasonable for uh for individuals to be able to promote their information.

Maybe they don't have the money for websites, maybe they don't have the money for uh for um advertising in newspapers, and maybe they they can't walk around their community because they're disabled.

So um I think we are putting uh candidates, we're limiting their abilities to uh to run for the election.

I don't think we'll have that problem with the the provincial election, but we certainly are limiting those abilities for our provincial or municipal election.

Thank you, Councilor Roger.

Councillor McKenzie.

Uh just to Councillor Rogers comment about the vehicles, I think it then depends on where you're parking your vehicle, because if you're parking on public land, um so I think you could only have it plastered on your car in your driveway or in a private driveway.

Otherwise it gets too convoluted.

Well, indeed, I would agree.

Um, but if you're gonna be parking in a shopping center, it's not carbon planned.

Thank you.

So we had some debate, some questions, um any other comments.

Oops.

Councilor Brown.

Just a quick one.

It was a bit of a concern last election because it's got the thing about electronic signage, and there's really no opportunity in town of Urla at this point, although I did uh hire the big sign heading out towards the soccer field in Langford and big sign there.

And if uh this bylaw kind of uh s addresses that uh like doesn't allow it.

Um if Jimmy Patterson was to put up a big electronic sign for rent in View Royal, would that be allowed?

I'm only talking like fifty feet by 40 feet.

Which is what the sign had.

That was the size of the sock.

That was the size sounds like you have a plan.

That was the size.

Someone had to have the D biggest sign, right?

Well does does this way it's written, would that preclude Jimmy Patterson's signs putting it up in if he ever did in View Royal for me renting that spot to put my ugly mug up on.

I got a great face for radio everyone tells me.

The prior bylaw or the bylaw that exists yesterday already did.

So yes.

That is illuminated, animated, rotating, flashing, moving lights, or other electrical features.

So yes.

I would not be not be permitted yesterday or in a month from now if this bylaws approved.

Uh let's go to uh Councilor Metzen and Counselor Qualitz online, please.

Yeah, I I'm happy with this bylaw.

Let's see how it works for the provincial election, and we can always make a determination whether we need more spots.

But the whole purpose was to reduce the signage and make the streets less less ugly with signage, although I thought my signs were were perfect.

Should have gone everywhere, but uh I I'm I'm supporting this bylaw, especially since I'm not putting up any more signs in the future.

I have your signs at my house.

Counselor Qualwitch, did you have a comment?

Uh thank you.

Good evening, everybody.

Yeah, Ron, you have some great signs.

It's like looking in a time machine seeing those signs, and it was so refreshing.

I really enjoyed them.

They still look good.

I agree.

Uh, so let's let's discuss this.

I I haven't really changed my stance on this from a few weeks ago.

I will I will say that this does promote equality amongst candidates, given the low amount of candidate turnout in general over the past three elections.

And uh, you know, John and Ron, you know, if you look at the results before that, there's never been a mass amount of candidates, and we we certainly want candidates, and we're promoting that, and we'll do what we can.

However, for this low level the playing field, uh uh is worship Tobias and Councillor McKenzie had uh no signs they were successful, so it can be done.

Um the only thing though is this vehicle uh amendment I need to add.

There's no way I can support this with uh with the vehicle signage attachment, just because we won't be able to enforce it.

I believe that would probably fall on the motor vehicle act.

We have no jurisdiction.

I don't think you could ever stop a car with bylaw or anything, nor would they ever want to do it.

So it's not really appropriate.

Uh so I would I would propose uh an amendment to remove that proportion uh just for uh just for ease of uh enforcement.

If you moved it, I seconded it.

Moved.

Second.

Okay, so that's uh you're moving the um bylaw with uh the removal of the car signage portion of it, correct?

Correct.

Sorry, uh myself, I don't know uh about um yeah you counselor, but um I'm not moving the bylaw.

I'm simply moving removal or seconding removal of that particular section.

Okay, well we're not on the same page, so uh we can let discussion go on.

I'll let uh his lordship call the question at some point.

Thank you, Counselor Kwitch.

Uh so uh I'm I'm getting a sense that the might might be not enforceable, so let's move that separately.

Um which page is that on?

It's page three of fifty-two, I think.

And it's uh section nine one three.

So I think we can just say uh removal of that clause, Sarah.

Would that be uh sufficient?

Um concerning motor vehicles and signage?

I if if I if I may and and again to the mover, I appreciate um um maybe the the idea of not having on a trailer, but on any vehicle, I don't hardly see that, you know, it a trailer does suggest it's gonna be a large sign.

Whereas if it's in a vehicle, an ordinary car, um, you know, it that's um and I I don't know if I want to split anybody.

I think Councillor Rogers, you got most people agreeing with you right now, so wouldn't start pleasing here.

Let's go.

So uh Sarah, is that acceptable to go ahead and rem uh remove the uh motor vehicle signage clause in that one?

I just will confirm it's under general rec regulations.

It was in the prior uh, well, the existing, we can call it the existing election procedures bylaw 989 as uh under the general regs 912.

It is a person must not place or permit to be placed an election sign on any vehicle or trailer attached to a vehicle.

And then under the proposed amendment, it's still a general reg.

And in this case, it is a person must not place or permit to be placed an election sign on any vehicle or trailer attached to a vehicle, and you're asking for removal.

Complete removal of the clause, yeah.

Okay.

And it would be considered perhaps a motor uh a moving violation under the MVA, and um as suggested by Councillor Kualowicz.

So the ask is for removal.

Yep.

Uh so we got a mover and a seconder for the removal.

All those in favor.

Any opposed?

Seeing none opposed motion carries.

Uh thank you for that.

And I think we're down to the number two, and that is election procedure bylaw nine eight nine.

It's amendment to our signage bylaw 1142 for the first to third reading.

Moved first through third.

Second, I'm assuming it's got that other section removed.

Yes.

Uh all of is there any comments questions council lemon quick comment um i will not be voting in favor of this because um as has been pointed out it's very difficult to if if if you have a big stack of signs and and that is the way that you traditionally or want to um communicate your intentions it's very hard to get them onto private property and also I think um the inability to use signs as a means of of um campaigning eliminates a lot of people.

It's it's um not it not everyone is um social media savvy, not everyone has the means to put up a website, and it's it's uh it's a tried and true way that a lot of people expect to be informed of who's running.

Thank you, Councillor.

Any other comments?

Counselor Rogers.

Yeah, um this is not gonna stop action science in View Royal.

Um I can think of the ENN, uh boat trestles, um uh uh the roads owned by administered highways, um, even even on the borders with sandwich.

Um so I um I think there we're gonna see a lot of signs in those places and they will probably be large signs thank you thank you counselor rogers i'll say some thoughts here i think uh the fact that there was too many signs in the last municipal election when you went to the corners like tilacum or wilkinson and um and interurban uh there they were actually uh almost a um uh a safety hazard.

There was that many.

I mean, though we just barely had enough counselors to cover off the two new vacancies we had, plus one and two mayors running, and uh and two of us ran without signs, and a few of us ran with a few signs, right?

Um, but I I think this is a forward-looking policy.

I actually do, and that um this isn't the only way people get information, and it's not just online, it's radio, it's word of mouth, it's newspaper.

Uh, it's not just uh the way to do it.

But I think adding down to the clutter, um, I'm looking forward to this and excited as a pilot project so we can see and to hear from other communities about maybe there's a bit of a difference here.

Um and maybe we're thinking outside of the box a bit.

So I I'm okay with the fact that um, you know, there's a comment that has been made a couple of times that it's hard to get people's people to put your side on their lawn.

Well, maybe they don't want to support you.

There's that, right?

Uh maybe they just don't want to support you at all, or or advertise that they support you.

So so I I mean that's the thing about signs.

So yeah, I'm in supportive of this as a starting place.

Um we'll see how it works and get things better.

Council Brown.

I'm a little disappointed.

I can't uh keep Jimmy Patterson in the style that he's used to comedy to, but I could always buy a vehicle with bigger windows, I suppose.

Uh Council McKenzie.

Yeah, I'll just kind of motivate a little too.

So uh I do think we are going to be a leader.

I've I've heard from other municipalities that now that they've heard we're doing it, they're like, yes, we want to do this too.

Like it's it's the way of the future.

And even um provincial candidates, I've heard from the them and their teams, they're like, good, we don't have to put up signs.

That's one thing off our list to do.

So I I really do think um it's gonna be we're leading it and people are gonna follow.

So and and I appreciate those of you that have invested in signs, and obviously you might have been smart enough not to put them towards one election that you can reuse them.

I think that's brilliant.

Um, but if you're getting them printed today, I guarantee you that's your largest cost for your election, likely, unless you're doing something uh out of the box.

Scott, did you have a comment?

Counselor Quowitz.

Thanks.

Yeah, I just wanted to reiterate my feelings on this and uh just make sure that everyone's aware of my position on it.

Uh I agree in a sense that this is uh trial, this is a pilot project.

We have the ability or the next council has the ability to change this.

Hey, we can change this before the next election if there's massive outcry and we find a reason that we made a mistake.

At this point, I think it's fair to say that uh election signs, probably if you look at the origin of them, they were a way to get people's attention.

Well, some of my colleagues already mentioned there are other ways to get people's attention.

Uh social media is something that people are very comfortable with going to.

If I can just say I talked to so many constituents, and the majority of them went online to read the profiles on the website of the town to see the pedigree of the candidates.

That is uh where educated voters go.

Will we miss out on um for lack of better words, some last-minute voters from a lack of election signs?

We might.

Certainly we might.

Uh we'll also garner probably much attention in the CRD from making this decision.

And I, for one, agree with Councillor McKenzie.

I believe we will be uh leaders in the industry.

My understanding is there's actually other places that does this already, but uh we are starting to move with the trend, and we'll see how it goes.

Counselor Rogers, please.

Thank you, Councillor Quellets.

Yeah, you know, it's an interesting trend, and I I will be curious to see um how many of you rural residents um will participate in the provincial election because how much they might have remembered.

If they don't leave this town, will they remember to vote?

Because the only way they're gonna know is by leaving this town.

You know, if to be re oh, there's a sign.

Damn, I gotta vote.

Um, so it will be interesting to see how that goes.

Um and I I still think that uh we have to uh consider the um the cost benefit and that mean cost.

Um it it indeed the a sign can be costly, but if you've uh had signs as long as Ron has, they've had a great payback.

So, you know, we talk about you know the the whole um uh plastics issue, but it's reused, reuse, reuse, reuse.

And I thought uh I think that there was um a significant achievement in that.

Um hopefully the uh information boards that uh that we put up will will help because we're gonna test that out with the province.

We will be putting our money on to uh informing the public about the provincial signs.

No, I think your election, right?

I I think the the process, as I understand it, Sarah, is that we that space is for elections BC to put a sign if they so choose.

It's not a town expense.

Oh, did you then it won't happen?

Okay, got it.

It won't happen.

It may not, but that that's their choice to do it.

Any other comments, questions, thoughts?

And thank you for all of your passionate points of view and perspectives on this.

And I know they they uh uh separate.

I I think there's going to be a couple indications that uh I'll be looking for for the provincial election, as one is the number of voters in View Royal.

Uh what was their turnout like?

Is there was there any difference there?

It'd be pretty hard to argue that if there was an increase because our population has also increased, that the the message isn't getting out that there is an election.

So I think we can use that as a good judge.

And the second one will be the federal election that's next year we can take a look at that one and see if there's a dip in in numbers as well.

So we've we got a mover and a seconder that was a lot of discussion or we do have a first to second or first to third um uh that has been moved and seconded and that is on bylaw uh nine eight nine for amendment to bylaw eleven forty two all those in favor all those opposed.

And noting uh councillors Lemon and Councilor Rogers are opposed, then I'll take Councilor Qualitz's in the the affirmative.

You sure we can't stretch this out for another 20 minutes.

We probably could if I could uh it's uh like open mic here.

Um and uh uh that brings us down to signed bylaw 950, and that's an amendment to also 11 or to 1144 vice 42.

So can I get a mover from first to third, please?

So moved.

Moved.

Moved by counselor matts and seconded by counselor McKenzie.

All those in favor, all those opposed.

Seeing none opposed, then motion carries.

Brings us to new business.

Counselor Rogers, ENN Rail Trail.

Thank you.

Um as um uh Mayor Tobiash mentioned, he uh you wish if you had put your uh item forward to the CRD uh for a study, and um we'll we'll see how that goes.

I understand that was rather difficult.

And so not not to um um um I I guess I wanted to emphasize um um the mayor's efforts.

Um and the whole point is um uh from that uh article that we saw on June the 6th, where there was a collision between the cyclist and a jogger, both of whom uh were taken to hospital because the cyclist is moving at 40 kilometers on uh the the gala the ENN uh in V Rowell at Ports Park.

You know, the issue is um uh speeding cyclists, distraction, inexperience, sight lines, pedestrian safety, and the whole essence of active transportation where it's safety for all ages and abilities.

The issue with the ENN, it has poor sight lines, there's contours, and the trail is constrained, unlike the galloping goose, by an active rail line and by the Railway Act that does not permit um any further expansion of the trail for pedestrian access.

So it uh we're we're very limited and very constrained.

Uh the ENN is a victim of its success uh with a dramatic increase in cycling, both uh commuters, uh recreation, tourism, and the of course the cycling endurance groups.

The non-cycling users have also increased, and those are walking to school, shops, and exercise, as well as those other modes mobility chairs, um, scooters, electric scooters, children, joggers, dogs, and distracted tourists.

Um, the CRD spent many years and many uh studies on the galloping queues and lockside for pedestrian safety, and uh I was part of that.

I helped motivate and uh we finally got that done.

Now we have a $50 million solution, but there is no investment of any money for ensuring the safety of pedestrians on the ENN.

Um, and quite frankly, doing nothing and waiting for the next accident is unacceptable.

Uh, the article uh was very clear that the CRD sets a speed limit to 32 kilometers an hour on the ENN.

And here we are going to be soon, I hope, with a staff report, posting and encouraging our neighborhoods to have a 30 speed limit.

So this is two kilometers faster than what we have in our streets, with a um, you know, what is it, six meter wide.

So that that is um uh uh again accept unacceptable.

So the the resolution that I hope um members will support, that we request CRD to reduce the cycling speed on regional trails from 32 to 20.

Um again, the rationale is there, that the CRD posts the 20 kilometer speed limit signs on a regular basis, every kilometer, so that there's um those coming off the trails won't re won't forget.

That we would also post signs encouraging users to report risks and cycling accidents on the trail to the CRD.

That the CRD both uh count the number of cyclists and the speeds and make that information available to uh the municipalities and the public.

That we they would coordinate with the police, fire and ambulance VIHO and ICBC2, we uh gather accident data and a severity of accidents, because that is the accident data is not being captured by the CRD at this point.

And that the CRD worked with ICBC to promote cycling insurance to reduce the uh the CRD share of liability for insurance claims.

Um and you know I've added another point about street lighting, but that's maybe neither here nor there.

So members, that's um I think it it is time.

Um we've um there's been lots of issues, lots of concerns about um um uh speeds on the ENN, and I don't think it's any um it's not acceptable any longer, and we should press the CRD to uh to take action on our regional trails.

Thank you.

I would move the um resolution um below.

Thank you, Councillor McKenzie.

So I I totally support what you're saying, Councillor Rogers.

I just don't know what the proper process is for um raising this with the CRD and how we do that in a way that would be successful.

So does it mean getting other municipalities on board?

Will will they just listen to us if we bring it forward?

I can give you a bit of an update.

So I brought this uh forward at the um June director's meeting for the board.

I asked for same day consideration, which I didn't get.

Uh it got referred to PARCS, which I also sit on.

Uh it did get passed then, and my resolution was uh pretty comprehensive.

Uh Councilor Rogers provided some very concrete solutions, which I know the board would never pass.

And what are the cost implications?

And they want to do a full study on it.

So the motion that I put forward passed and it is going back for uh study, but our last policy on this was when 2011 when they first kind of popularized um the goose uh and and and we were pushing it through.

And it was not a very comprehensive study about shared use on the goose at that time.

They realized that uh many of you have made the comment that we're a victim or the trails are a victim of their own success, that there's lots of people on them.

Um I did get um support to also in the interim, while this study is going on, is to put up more comprehensive signs about paying attention, sharing the trails.

Um but uh it it isn't our jurisdiction um on the trail itself.

But I had a question for staff.

If we wanted, if View Royal wanted to put uh signage up um to be determined uh would that be a permission from CRD to make it visible from the trail, or are there junctures that it kind of borders on municipal land that passes through View Royal?

Mayor Tobias, it's a it's a difficult question for me to answer without engaging with the CRD about this.

Exactly, Ivan.

And and you know, and and one kind of catch-all is like um uh you're responsible to kind of share the the trail and that normally uh it's either articulated that um if you're driving a a vehicle under power then you give way to a pedestrian regardless of whether it's a bike or uh a scooter or whatever.

But I think our biggest danger right now to Councillor Rogers' point is excessive speed and perhaps control and that nobody's really driving defensively across it.

I'm gonna go online first.

I think Councillor Matson you had a point.

Uh a couple of one of them I think for example electric bikes I think they're they're governed to do about 30k unless somebody changes them.

Um at 20 kilometers an hour road bikes go faster than that it's gonna be totally unenforceable and I mean so I certainly can't support support that it's it's an unenforceable bylaw if it ever gets passed.

And the other part is I mean it's not our trail.

I mean that's the CRDs uh so I I have you know I have a problem with trying to set speed limits on something that are that that won't be a listened to and won't be effective so I can't certainly can't support that motion.

Thank you, Councillor Mattson.

Councillor Brown.

Yeah, certainly a safety concern.

I hear the same comments.

In fact, I had a blind woman or legally blind woman with her walker uh you know, telling me of a situation where she got almost clipped by some bikes.

To me, the education is the important thing, and I don't know if the C or D can um add that to the job duties of the uh bylaw officers or the park rangers.

Um they have e bikes that they can use.

Uh, and then um not only pedestrians, but where the trail crosses the roads, and uh I see it every day on Atkins Road, and sometimes I get to slam my brakes on or I slam my brakes on because someone in front of me stopped for a group of bikes going through, and it's a pedestrian crossing.

So they aren't obligated to stop, but people do, and some people ride their bikes, they don't even look.

They just just whiz right through.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more accidents.

So that that's almost as big a concern as the pedestrians, but I think the visibility, the education, you could follow the example of City of Victoria, where they're parking people, they're parking ambassadors now.

So it could be a trail ambassador or something like that, whatever you call it.

Uh, to have the visibility, so people know there's some other.

I I agree with um Councilor Madsen to enforce it would be really, really difficult.

Not impossible, but really difficult.

Um, but but the stop signs are there for the bicycles and and the bile officers have set there and give warning tickets and and education.

And uh, like I don't think they call a bike to work today anymore, but they have the same thing education plans.

And I think he could use the park rangers and the bile officers uh to do more of that.

Councillor Lemon, please.