Council removed the proposed 420 Tamarack item from the agenda until staff provide a report, but residents still used public input to press for a gentler housing designation and raise concerns about narrow streets, traffic and infrastructure. A draft regional transit plan prompted a call for better West Shore service, especially for Royal Bay and the Sooke Road corridor, while BC Transit said funding and missing road right-of-way remain major barriers. On sewer expansion, Council chose not to start a city-led conversion program after a survey found limited support and high costs; staff will explain the results and keep the existing resident-initiated process. Council also backed a hybrid approach to development permits, bringing most larger projects to Council while preserving protections for applications already substantially complete.
Generated from the recording's captions and the official minutes.
Council struck the proposed 420 Tamarack item from the agenda because the report was not ready. The Mayor said staff were expected to bring a report to the next Council meeting. The amended agenda also added a confidential-negotiations reason for the later in-camera meeting.
Agreement
Council approved the amended agenda without opposition.
The Mayor said Council should wait for the report before considering the Tamarack matter.
Routine: approve the meeting agenda, removing the Tamarack Road bylaw item and adding a stated reason for closing part of the meeting to the public.
Official wording: THAT the Agenda of the Regular Council meeting of May 25, 2026 be adopted as presented with the following amendments:
Strike Item 9.1 Colwood Land Use Bylaw No. 151, 1989, Amendment No. 232 (CD 44 - 420 Tamarack Road), Bylaw No. 2115, 2026 - First, Second and Third Reading
Include the following under Item 10.1 Motion to Close the Meeting to the Public:
Section 90 (2) (b) the consideration of information received and held in confident relating to negotiations
(i) Between the municipality and a provincial government of the federal government, or both.
Eleven members of the public spoke. A representative of a development company asked Council to protect development-permit applications already in progress from rule changes. Several residents urged the City to reconsider the high-density designation around Tamarack Road and Gamble Place, citing access, traffic, servicing and safety concerns; some said they would support townhouses or other gentler housing instead. Other speakers backed better rapid transit to Colwood and asked when a long-promised review of residential speed limits would happen. Council also agreed to send the Capital Regional District a letter supporting no-smoking signs at bus stops; the speaker’s request was to publicize the existing ban on smoking within seven metres of a stop.
Agreement
Council supported sending the Capital Regional District a letter backing no-smoking signs at bus stops.
The Mayor thanked speakers and said Council had heard their concerns.
Disagreement
The development-company representative argued that applicants who began under the current rules should be allowed to finish under those rules; some councillors later favoured bringing applications to Council for greater public visibility.
Residents opposed high-rise development in the Tamarack and Gamble area, while the discussion also recognized the need for housing and future growth.
Council will send the regional district a letter supporting a requirement for no-smoking signs at every bus stop in the region.
Official wording: THAT Council endorse sending a letter of support to the Capital Regional District (CRD) for the inclusion of a requirement for "No Smoking" signage at all bus stops within the region.
BC Transit presented a draft 25-year regional plan with proposals for rapid bus routes, higher-capacity transit to the West Shore, a frequent-transit network, regional express service and app-booked, on-demand buses for lower-density areas. A Royal Bay express service and improved links along Sooke Road and Kelly Road were discussed as opportunities for Colwood. BC Transit said service growth is constrained by funding and slower bus speeds; extending dedicated lanes on the Island Highway also depends on securing more right-of-way. The draft will be revised with local feedback and taken to the transit commission in July; a wider network review is planned after the regional plan is approved.
Agreement
Councillors stressed that Colwood and Royal Bay need service that keeps pace with fast growth.
BC Transit and Council recognized that bus priority, land-use planning and cooperation among governments are important to improving service.
Disagreement
Councillors argued for stronger attention to Colwood routes such as Sooke Road and Kelly Road; BC Transit said route choices and rapid-transit alignments remain subject to further study.
Council pressed for more service sooner, while BC Transit said limited expansion funding and traffic delays make that difficult.
Council approved a $477,204 contract with Landscape Structures Inc. for playground equipment and installation at Herm Williams Park, Meadows Park South and Meadows Park Green. The item passed as part of the consent agenda, without separate debate.
Agreement
Council approved the contract through the consent agenda.
Carried 6 to 0R2026-163Item 7.11:09:29 Watch · Read
Staff can hire Landscape Structures Inc. to supply and install playground equipment at Herm Williams Park, Meadows Park South, and Meadows Park Green for $477,204.
Official wording: THAT Council authorize staff to award the contract for the procurement and installation of playground equipment for Herm Williams Park, Meadows Park South, and Meadows Park Green to Landscape Structures Inc, through the Canoe Procurement Group of Canada, in the amount of $477,204.
Council approved the variance permit for 392 Royal Bay Drive, with a requirement that the updated plan show grass-crete pavers or similar treatment for the visitor parking stall. The item passed as part of the consent agenda, without separate debate.
Agreement
Council approved the permit and the added treatment for the visitor stall through the consent agenda.
Carried 6 to 0R2026-164Item 7.21:09:29 Watch · Read
Approve the requested development variance for 392 Royal Bay Drive, with the applicant required to show grass-crete pavers or a similar surface treatment for the visitor parking stall on the updated plan.
Official wording: THAT Development Variance Permit No. DVP00016 for 392 Royal Bay Drive be approved;
AND THAT the applicant add to their updated plan "grass crete pavers" or similar treatment to the visitor stall, to be attached to the Development Variance Permit.
Staff reported 428 survey responses, with about 43% of Colwood properties still on septic systems. The City has 57 sewer-service zones and estimated expansion costs of about $103 million; many zones would cost more than $30,000 per property, a level most respondents were unwilling to pay. Council decided not to develop a city-led conversion program or launch targeted engagement now. Instead, staff will prepare a clear summary explaining the survey results and the status quo, while residents can continue to pursue sewer service through the existing local-area process. Councillors also discussed the region’s future sewer capacity, but the motion did not direct staff to begin a new capacity initiative.
Agreement
Council agreed the survey results should be explained to the public, including why the City is not starting a broader conversion program.
Council supported retaining the existing resident-initiated process for groups seeking sewer service.
Disagreement
The original staff recommendation called for a draft conversion program and targeted engagement; councillors questioned whether the limited interest justified the staff work.
A councillor urged the City to raise long-term sewer capacity with regional and provincial partners, while others focused on the immediate survey response and existing process.
Carried 6 to 0R2026-165Item 8.11:36:12 Watch · Read
Council will receive the survey results and keep the current approach to sewer expansion, without further work on a sewer-conversion program or targeted public engagement for now. Staff will add a clear website explanation of why the current approach remains in place and how residents can apply for sewer service.
Official wording: THAT Council receive the results of the Sewer Expansion Community Survey;
AND THAT Council direct staff not to proceed with further work on a sewer conversion program or targeted engagement at this time, maintaining the current approach to sewer expansion;
AND FURTHER THAT Council direct staff to provide a concise and clear summary why status quo applies, including how to apply for sewer service on the city website.
Staff said lower-than-expected development activity had freed some capacity for additional policy work. A report for the next Council meeting would set out priorities including a gentle infill strategy, the Outlook Park management plan, an age-friendly plan review and a public art policy. A councillor asked why the public art policy was listed after related budget funding had been removed; staff said it was a citywide policy, not just a project-specific one.
Agreement
Council received the update and welcomed a further report setting out project priorities.
Disagreement
A councillor questioned how the public art policy could proceed after its budget funding was removed; staff said the policy had prior Council direction and was not limited to a single project.
Carried 6 to 0R2026-166Item 8.21:44:36 Watch · Read
Routine: receive the staff update on policy projects for information.
Official wording: THAT Council receive the staff memo titled "Policy Project Update" for information.
8.3 Decision Points for Council for Amendments to Delegated Authority for Form and Character Development Permits
zoning development1 public speaker1:44:36 Watch · Read
Council supported a hybrid system for approving development permits. Most form-and-character permits for projects of more than four units in designated areas would come to Council, while staff would keep authority for smaller projects and permits in defined master-planned areas with Council-approved design guidelines. Council’s direction also retained staff authority for permit extensions and security, while requiring Council approval for major changes and most variances. The passed amendments added clearer tests for changes in master-planned communities, objective criteria for major amendments, predictable timelines, and rules for resubmission after a refusal. On applications already in progress, Council amended the approach so current applications deemed substantially complete before the bylaw change could continue under the existing process. Staff will return with an amending bylaw for readings.
Agreement
Councillors supported bringing more large development permits to Council to improve public visibility over what will actually be built.
Council supported a hybrid system rather than requiring Council approval for every permit, with the approach to be reviewed as experience accumulates.
The motion passed unanimously.
Disagreement
A development-company representative had argued during public input that applications already in progress should retain the existing process. Councillors differed on how broad that protection should be: some emphasized fairness to applicants, while others stressed public oversight and transparency.
Councillors also discussed how to handle ownership changes in master-planned areas; the adopted direction linked Council review to proposals that materially differ from the approved design framework, rather than to a change of ownership alone.
Carried 6 to 0R2026-167Item 8.32:43:04 Watch · Read
Staff are to prepare changes that would have Council decide on form-and-character permits for developments of more than four units in specified permit areas, while staff would continue deciding other permits. In master-planned communities, staff would keep authority in areas covered by Council-approved design guidelines, while Council would decide permits outside those areas and certain materially different proposals after ownership changes. The changes would set objective definitions and procedures, keep substantially complete applications under the existing rules, and provide no special protection for applications submitted but not issued before the changes take effect. Staff would retain authority over permit security, extensions, and minor amendments; Council would decide major changes to permits it approved and most variances. Staff are also to bring back procedural recommendations, including application and reconsideration rules, and return with an amending bylaw for readings.
Official wording: THAT Council direct staff to amend Development Permit Delegation Bylaw No. 1742, 2018, as follows:
1. Form and Character Development Permits - General Approach
THAT Council approve a hybrid approach, whereby Form and Character Development Permits for developments of more than four units within the following Development Permit Areas are approved by Council, with all other Form and Character Development Permits remaining delegated to staff:
Centres
Mixed Use Employment Centre
Neighbourhood
Hillside
Light Industrial
2. Master Planned Communities
THAT Council:
Retain delegated authority within those sub-areas of master planned communities that are subject to Council-approved design guidelines (e.g. The Commons in Latoria South Sub-Area Plan, The Landing in Royal Beach (Beachlands) Sub-Area Plan, Ocean Grove);
Require Council approval for Development Permits outside of those defined sub-areas; and
Require Council approval for Development Permits where land ownership has transferred from the original developer and any subsequent development proposal(s) materially differ from the original master planned community design framework or approved design guidelines.
AND THAT grounds the decision in land-use planning rationale rather than ownership status;
AND THAT staff include objective criteria within the amending bylaw defining: “major amendment,” “material alteration,” and “development unit count thresholds” to ensure consistency and procedural fairness;
AND THAT existing Development Permit applications deemed substantially complete prior to adoption of the bylaw amendments continue under the existing delegated authority framework;
AND THAT staff report back with procedural recommendations to ensure Development Permit approvals maintain predictable timelines and avoid unnecessary delays;
AND FURTHER THAT staff include:
1. Reapplication waiting periods,
2. Revised submission criteria,
3. Defined reconsideration procedures as part of the broader approvals-process review.
3. In-Stream Development Permit Applications
THAT Council direct that no in-stream protection be provided for Development Permit applications that have been submitted but not issued prior to adoption of amendments to the Development Permit Delegation Bylaw No. 1742, 2018.
4. Scope of Delegated Authorities
THAT Council:
Retain delegated authority for the determination and release of Development Permit security;
Retain delegated authority for Development Permit extensions;
Require Council approval for major amendments that materially alter a Form and Character Development Permit approved by Council;
Retain delegated authority for minor Development Permit amendments that do not result in substantive changes to form, character, or site layout;
Delegate authority to issue Development Permits that vary land use regulations for developments of four units or less, limited to minor variances, where the proposal is consistent with the applicable OCP design guidelines; and
Retain Council approval to consider and approve all other Development Permit variances.
AND THAT Council direct staff to return with an amending Bylaw to the Development Permit Delegation Bylaw No. 1742, 2018 for consideration of first, second and third reading.
Councillor Day highlighted the report’s review of the Mobile Youth Services Team and other coordinated regional services. She noted concern about possible West Shore Royal Canadian Mounted Police funding cuts to positions pairing officers with counsellors, and described small grants that helped street-involved youth access support while waiting for services. The report was received for information.
Agreement
Council heard the update on youth and family services and the work described in the annual report.
Carried 6 to 0R2026-168Item 8.4
Routine: receive the committee’s 2025 annual report for information.
Official wording: THAT the Victoria Family Court & Youth Justice Committee - Annual Report 2025 be received for information.
Council voted to close the meeting to the public for discussion of labour or employee relations and confidential information about negotiations involving the municipality and provincial or federal government. The transcript records the vote but not the closed-session discussion.
Routine: close the meeting to the public to discuss employee relations and confidential negotiation information, and determine which municipal staff may attend.
Official wording: THAT the meeting be closed to the public at 9:11 pm accordance with the following sections of the Community Charter
90 (1)A part of a council meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following:
(c)labour relations or other employee relations;
90 (2)(b)the consideration of information received and held in confident relating to negotiations:
(i)Between the municipality and a provincial government of the federal government, or both.
91 (1)If all or part of a meeting is closed to the public, the council may allow one or more municipal officers and employees to attend or exclude them from attending, as it considers appropriate.
Routine: approve the minutes of the May 11 Council meeting and receive the March 17 Emergency Planning Committee minutes for information.
Official wording: THAT the minutes of the Regular Council meeting held May 11, 2026 be adopted as presented;
AND THAT the minutes of the Emergency Planning Committee meeting held March 17, 2026 be received for information.