Council approved a $344,766 contract for a South Colwood dog park, while debating whether that was the right site and whether the price was justified. The sharpest disagreement concerned 420 Tamarack Road: residents split over a proposed apartment building, and councillors argued over how quickly to review the neighbourhood’s land-use rules; Council did not approve the project, but directed staff to bring it forward and added a pause on further development applications in the area. Council also sent the small-scale multi-unit housing rules back for more work, with councillors seeking tighter limits on building size. Earlier, residents used public participation to object to the proposed scale and location of a Colwood Creek community garden and to ask for consultation.
Generated from the recording's captions and the official minutes.
Routine: approve the meeting agenda, removing the in-camera item and adding Notice of Motion as Item 9.
Official wording: THAT the Agenda of the Regular Council meeting of June 8, 2026 be adopted as presented with the following amendments:
Remove Item 9 In-Camera
Add Notice of Motion as Item 9
Council adopted the May 25, 2026 Council minutes and received the February 25, 2026 Capital West Accessibility Advisory Committee minutes for information.
Routine: adopt the May 25 Council minutes and receive the February 25 accessibility advisory committee minutes for information.
Official wording: THAT the minutes of the Regular Council meeting held May 25, 2026 be adopted as presented;
AND THAT the committee meeting minutes be received for information:
Capital West Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - February 25, 2026
parks environment8 public speakers10:10 Watch · Read
Eight people spoke during public participation. Most objected to a proposed large community garden in Colwood Creek Park, saying nearby residents had not been consulted and that the number of plots and fencing could displace other park uses. Speakers also questioned whether the gardens would meet local need, raised concerns about traffic, parking and rats, and asked Council to pause the proposal for consultation. A representative of a local environmental group asked the City to press the province to continue its climate-action funding program. Council extended the speaking period to 34 minutes; no decision was made on the garden proposal at this item.
Agreement
Speakers who supported community gardens still called for a better assessment of local need and the proposal’s fit with this park.
A speaker raised the importance of maintaining reliable funding for the City’s climate-preparedness and climate-action work.
Disagreement
Speakers opposed to the Colwood Creek proposal argued its scale and location would take space from established park users; they called for a pause and meaningful neighbourhood consultation.
Council supported the Colwood Medical Clinic’s submission for the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) Excellence Award in Service Delivery. The item was approved through the consent agenda.
Support the Colwood Medical Clinic’s application to be considered for a UBCM award recognizing service delivery.
Official wording: THAT Council supports the submission of the Colwood Medical Clinic for consideration for the UBCM Excellence Award in Service Delivery.
Council authorized a $344,766 contract with Landscape Structures Inc., through the Canoe Procurement Group of Canada, to build the South Colwood Dog Park. Staff said a new fence inside the existing property-line fence could create a buffer for nearby homes, with hedging chosen in consultation with residents. The park will have no dedicated parking, and staff said they could monitor parking on nearby streets. A councillor also suggested considering accessible parking in future.
Agreement
Several councillors supported providing an off-leash dog park for South Colwood and described it as a needed local amenity.
Staff said they would consult nearby residents about any city-owned hedge buffer.
Disagreement
The mayor questioned whether the cost and site were the best options, noting that the survey had only 29 responses and asking whether a site near Quarry Park or elsewhere might serve more residents.
A councillor argued the location had been considered and supported before, and that delaying it again would be unjustified.
Allow staff to hire Landscape Structures Inc. to build the South Colwood Dog Park for $344,766 through the Canoe Procurement Group of Canada.
Official wording: THAT Council authorize staff to award the contract for the construction of the South Colwood Dog Park to Landscape Structures Inc, through the Canoe Procurement Group of Canada, in the amount of $344,766.
7.2 Policy Program for Remainder of 2026 and Looking to 2027
zoning development13 public speakers58:09 Watch · Read
Thirteen people spoke about 420 Tamarack Road. Some residents opposed the proposed apartment building, citing the neighbourhood’s current land-use designation, traffic and fire-access concerns, and the risk that one project would set a precedent. Other speakers supported it as a source of housing for renters, seniors and families. The applicant said the proposal was designed at the minimum density allowed by the current Official Community Plan (OCP) and would add walking and cycling connections. Staff recommended a comprehensive OCP update after the 2026 election, with three smaller policy projects in 2026: an intensive residential development permit amendment, the Outlook Park Management Plan and an Age Friendly Plan review. Council defeated an amendment to replace the Age Friendly Plan work with a Tamarack/Gamble land-use amendment and a Gentle Infill Strategy. It then endorsed staff’s proposed sequencing, directed staff to bring forward the 420 Tamarack rezoning for consideration under the current OCP, and added a direction to bring forward a moratorium on further development in the area until the next Council term. The rezoning itself was not approved at this meeting.
Agreement
Council agreed that a comprehensive OCP update should be prepared for the next Council term and that 420 Tamarack should be brought forward for a decision under the existing OCP.
The final policy-program motion passed with a direction to pause further development in the Tamarack/Gamble area until the next Council term.
Disagreement
Residents opposed to the Tamarack proposal said the six-storey building, traffic and infrastructure pressures were not suited to their neighbourhood and argued that the promised policy review should happen first. Supporters said the site could provide much-needed housing in a quiet, connected location.
Councillors disagreed over whether to complete a Tamarack/Gamble designation review and Gentle Infill Strategy now or defer that work to the broader OCP update. The amendment to advance those two projects instead of the Age Friendly Plan review was defeated.
One councillor argued that the proposed building could proceed as a distinct project while further applications were paused; another stressed that Council was deciding policy-work priorities, not approving the rezoning that night.
Defeated 7 to 0R2026-179Item 7.22:38:10 Watch · Read
Replace the Age Friendly Strategy in the proposed work plan with an Official Community Plan amendment to remove the Tamarack/Gamble neighbourhood from the Triangle Lands designation, and add the Gentle Infill Strategy.
Official wording: THAT the age friendly strategy be removed and, in its place, the OCP amendment to remove the Tamarack / Gamble neighbourhood from the Triangle Lands designation and the Gentle Infill Strategy be added.
Carried 6 to 1R2026-180Item 7.22:50:13 Watch · Read
Add a direction for staff to bring forward a pause on further development in the Tamarack/Gamble area, lasting until the next Council term or until Council makes an Official Community Plan decision for the area.
Official wording: THAT the following be added to the main motion:
AND FURTHER THAT Council direct staff to bring forward a moratorium on further development in the subject area Tamarack/Gamble area until the next term of Council or when an Official Community Plan decision is made in the area.
Carried 6 to 1R2026-181Item 7.22:51:01 Watch · Read
Set the remaining 2026 policy priorities as the intensive residential development permit OCP amendment, Outlook Park Management Plan and Age Friendly Plan Review, while recognizing that work to scope a comprehensive OCP update will follow the 2026 election. Staff are to provide a project scope, engagement plan and milestones at the start of each project, report twice yearly on policy work and planning capacity, bring the 420 Tamarack rezoning application forward under the current OCP designation, and bring forward a moratorium on further development in the Tamarack/Gamble area until the next Council term or an OCP decision for the area.
Official wording: THAT Council endorse the Planning Department's proposed sequencing of policy work, recognizing that the City's next major policy priority will be preparation for a comprehensive Official Community Plan (OCP) update to be scoped following the 2026 local government election;
AND THAT Council direct staff to prioritize the following policy projects for advancement during the remainder of 2026, within available departmental capacity:
Intensive Residential Development Permit Official Community Plan (OCP) Amendment
Outlook Park Management Plan
Age Friendly Plan Review
AND THAT staff return to Council at the outset of each project with a project summary that identifies a high level scope of work, engagement plan and key milestones.
AND THAT Council direct staff to return on a biannual basis with updates on policy work and Planning Department capacity, including any recommended adjustments based on changes in development application activity;
AND THAT Council direct staff to bring forward the rezoning application for 420 Tamarack Road for consideration under the existing Official Community Plan land use designation;
AND FURTHER THAT Council direct staff to bring forward a moratorium on further development in the subject area Tamarack/Gamble area until the next term of Council or when an Official Community Plan decision is made in the area.
Council abandoned the earlier rezoning bylaw for 221 Goldfinch Road and gave first, second and third readings to a replacement, site-specific bylaw. It would allow two duplexes with secondary suites on the currently single-family residential property. Before adoption, the applicant must register a two-metre road dedication to provide an 18-metre right-of-way along Goldfinch Road. Staff will also return with a driveway variance for Council to consider alongside adoption.
Agreement
Council supported the replacement zoning and the required road dedication and follow-up variance process.
Carried 7 to 0R2026-182Item 8.13:01:43 Watch · Read
Drop the earlier proposed rezoning for 221 Goldfinch Road and give three readings to the replacement rezoning. Before it can be adopted, the owner must dedicate two metres of frontage to widen the road right-of-way to 18 metres. Staff must also notify the public and bring back a variance application for Council to consider alongside adoption.
Official wording: THAT Colwood Land Use Bylaw No. 151, 1989, Amendment No. 224 (221 Goldfinch Road), Bylaw No. 2073, 2025, be abandoned;
AND THAT Colwood Land Use Bylaw No. 151, 1989, Amendment No. 233 (CD45 – 221 Goldfinch Road), Bylaw No. 2118, 2026, be given first, second and third readings;
AND THAT prior to adoption of Colwood Land Use Bylaw No. 151, 1989, Amendment No. 233 (CD45 – 221 Goldfinch Road), Bylaw No. 2118, 2026, a Section 107 Plan of Road Dedication along Goldfinch Road be registered at the BC Land Title Office to dedicate 2 metres to achieve an overall 18-metre Right of Way width along the subject property’s frontage;
AND FURTHER THAT Council direct staff to prepare and send public notifications and return with a report presenting Development Variance Permit Application No. DVP00018 for Council’s consideration, to be considered concurrently with the adoption of Colwood Land Use Bylaw No. 151, 1989, Amendment No. 233 (CD45 – 221 Goldfinch Road), Bylaw No. 2118, 2026.
Council referred the small-scale multi-unit housing zoning bylaw back to staff for a more comprehensive review rather than giving it readings. Councillors questioned building size, lot coverage, setbacks and height, and whether the rules should include a floor-area-ratio limit of about 1.2 to align with the OCP. Staff said the province’s rules seek to avoid restrictions but that Council could set additional limits. Staff warned that the review could miss the June 30 provincial deadline; the revised bylaw was expected to return to Council in July.
Agreement
Council agreed more review was needed before deciding on the bylaw.
Disagreement
Some councillors wanted tighter limits to prevent buildings from overwhelming existing neighbourhoods; others had not yet settled on specific changes and asked staff to return with a fuller review.
Send the proposed small-scale multi-unit housing bylaw back to staff for a more thorough review before Council decides whether to proceed.
Official wording: THAT " Colwood Land Use Bylaw No. 151, 1989, Amendment No. 227 (SSMUH) Bylaw No. 2091, 2026" be referred to staff for a more comprehensive review prior to Council decision.
Council gave first, second and third readings to the off-street parking regulations connected to small-scale multi-unit housing. No substantive discussion was captured.
Carried 7 to 0R2026-184Item 8.33:12:27 Watch · Read
Give three readings to the proposed off-street parking rules for small-scale multi-unit housing.
Official wording: THAT " Off-Street Parking Regulations Bylaw No 1909-3(SSMUH)" be given first, second and third reading.
Council gave the Public Notice Bylaw first, second and third readings. The bylaw shifts the City’s statutory public notices to its website. In response to concerns about website access and residents who are not online, staff said they would continue using social media and the monthly Colwood’s Corners publication during the transition, although the publication would not be the formal legal notice.
Agreement
Staff said additional communication channels would continue during the transition to the website-based notice system.
Disagreement
A councillor questioned whether the City’s website was reliable enough to carry statutory notices and raised access for people without computers or social media.
Carried 7 to 0R2026-185Item 8.43:16:27 Watch · Read
Give three readings to the proposed bylaw setting the City’s public-notice requirements.
Official wording: THAT "Public Notice Bylaw No. 2117, 2026" be given first, second and third reading.
Three notices of motion were read for discussion at the June 22 meeting. One proposes a staff directory, clearer website ownership, improved bylaw and development-tracker pages, and a tracker for Council decisions. The other two ask staff to study speed-control options for the Kelly Road playground zone, including speed feedback and raised crossings, and low-maintenance hardscaping for selected traffic circles and cul-de-sac islands. No decisions were made on these proposals at this meeting.
Decisions
Official · from the minutes
All 12 decisions from the minutes appear under the agenda items above.