Transcript: Council - 13 Jul 2026

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Uh, I would like to call the regular council meeting for Monday, July 13th to order. Uh, we have quorum. Uh, council war does send his regrets. And uh at this time I would like to respectfully acknowledge that we're gathered on the traditional lands of the Lquangan speaking people represented today by the Songis and Cassps nations. Were grateful to work, live, and play in this special place. Item two, approval of agenda. Uh there's just a few changes uh to the agenda. Um uh we inadvertently dropped a a notice of motion uh from the last meeting. Uh it's going to be added 8.4 four which is service review and budget 2027 at that is 8.4 and uh I'm going to I'm going to remove item 7.3 from the consent and it will become item 8.5.

U may have a mover and seconder to adopt today's agenda as amended. Thank you very much. Uh councelor Olsen and Councelor Day. Thank you very much. uh discussion. Seeing none, I'll call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Okay. I just have uh it's uh I just have one short message um for a change. A little different for me. Uh but uh today I just want to remind people today is the last um regular council meeting. Uh we now will go on to summer recess and we will reconvene 24 August I believe 24th August and that's all I have to say. I just wish everyone like to thank council uh very much for uh for great first half part of the season here and uh we've accomplished a lot actually.

Oh yeah. and we decided to look really casual today. And you know, please vote for me the best Hawaiian shirt. Anyways, I will move on to uh the adoption of minutes. May I have a move and second for the adoption receipt of the minutes uh details of the recommendation? Thank you very much, Council Grove and Councelor Jordison. And are there any errors or omissions? Councelor Jordison. Sorry that I should just mention the one set of minutes did mention the approval of the um notice of motion. Yes. And so it's within the minutes too. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. On that note, uh no errors errors or omissions. Um I should call the question. Any opposed?

Seeing none, motion carries. At this point in time, we'll open the floor up to public budget participation. There were three written submissions that were received prior to the agenda publication and uh one was a petition and they're attached to the agenda and one written submission was received after the agenda publication and will be appended to the agenda uh following tonight's meeting. In addition, they will be available on the city's uh meeting website tomorrow. Again, I'd like to thank the public uh for the written submissions. Believe me, we read them all and uh you um and no members of the public have registered to speak virtually. So, at this time, I I'd like to just invite members to uh come up and speak. [snorts] Uh just just so that if you're new to this, there's the rules are you get two minutes to speak.

And you'll see there's lights on the podium. There's a green light. That means you're allowed to talk. When you see the amber light flash up, that means you have 30 seconds and the red light is we ask you to wrap it up then. Okay? And uh it just for your information, if you want a written answers to your questions on the podium, there's little business cards. So, if you just write a quick email to uh corporate services, which is on that on that business card, they will respond to you in writing. And uh just want to remind the public that uh comments pertaining to the partial exclusion of Cowwood Creek Park from the agricultural land reserve are prohibited at this meeting because they've been subject to a public hearing. At this point we'll move on to item six which is delegations arts and culture callwood society and Kathleen Schmaltz the president of the society.

Oh, sorry. I I'm so trying to I'm really getting ahead of myself tonight. I invite people to come on up and then I say, "Forget it. Don't come up." So, come on up, please. Sorry about that. We'll get you next public participation. Hi, I'm Andrew Paling. I live in Royal Bay. Um, I purchased a plot of land in the beachlands that I have now obtained financing for and I'm ready to begin building after my close date of next week. So, I'm speaking to section 8.3 of the agenda tonight. Um, I'd like to ask that the proposed bylaw amendment for the elimination of the requirement for the builders to obtain a separate permit in addition to the building permit be moved forward and passed now. I understand this amendment will nearly certainly be adopted in September and has already moved through readings and that this is simply an administrative delay in adoption. While it may not seem like a large difference, it is to the homeowners in my position who will begin carrying mortgages and/or loans before September and are forced to decide between delaying the start of their

house build and paying significantly more interest on our loans or obtaining a soontobe obsolete permit that incurs a large charge. We are ready and have obtained the land. I invested in my future in the beachlands because I believe in the area and in growing a community and planting my roots there for the rest of my life. I'd like to get started without needing to choose which unnecessary financial burden I must take on. I'm sure you have heard it before, but as a young person in Canada trying to achieve a dream of home ownership, every dollar counts, and I'd really love to put my dollars towards the things that are necessary and important. I would really appreciate the council's consideration to move this forward and allow myself and the members of my new community to be able to get started and see the beachlands add value to Cwood quicker than it already has. I've walked the neighborhood many times since the sidewalks opened, and I've seen other folks do the same and enjoy the views and ocean breeze. It'd be really lovely to have a chance to avoid further delays

and start to turn the beautiful yet dusty and barren area into a vibrant and lush community a few months sooner than we could if we were have to wait until September. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next, please. Hi there. Uh, thank you mayor and council for having me. Uh, my name is Corey McFersonen. I also am uh, building in the beachlands. Um, and I'm just here to talk about the same thing, the forming character development permit um, that is uh, potentially being put in place for um, or the mortorium on it I should say uh, coming in place for fall. Uh I'm hoping that we might be able to consider advancing that uh to a much earlier time frame uh as we are also closing next week. Uh and so I would uh really appreciate the opportunity to be able to um the echo is very very uh distracting. Um but I'd like to be able to also build without having to worry about incurring extra costs and whatnot

having to delay the build until uh September. So, I'd appreciate that consideration as well. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next, please. Hi. I also wanted to quickly address 8.3 uh as a future homeowner in the beach lands. Um, also hoping for that moratorum that others have discussed to be implemented. I think it's the fair thing to do for homeowners and consistent with the direction that council is already taking uh and it would help expedite aspects of the build for us and avoid uh additional and unnecessary delays. Thanks. Thank you very much. Next, please. Oops. You just pushed the button. No. Uh, right on the base of the mic.

Thank you. Uh, good afternoon or good evening, I guess. My name is Brienne B. Um, I am a resident of Cwood for the last six years. I live in the culde-sac of Whitehead Place. So, it's a 10 um, it's a 40-year-old culde-sac uh, built in the late 1970s. I'm here with a few of the uh, other members who live in my culde-sac. We are very concerned about a very long-term development that has been taking place for about 15 years directly behind us uh on Gulf Stream Avenue. It is 460 Gulf Stream Avenue. My understanding is they're planning on building uh very large condo complexes directly behind our home. Uh for the last four years, there has been active development at all times. Uh dust, noise, um currently there's a portaotty and a gentleman uh living on there as well. The excavator only moves about four to five minutes every single day.

Um, at one point there was many excavators, but nothing has been happening. Um, in my research in all of this, uh, they have gone through several permits and, uh, they continue to be expired. They're, um, here today to get their permit renewed. Um, we would like to protest this. We are very unhappy with what has been going on. It is expensive. They have ruined all of our fences. The back directly onto the um the back of where they're building. Their excavators have ripped down all of our fences. Um the noise. My son is four years old. He's now in love with excavators. That is his thing. He says good night to them every single night because he believes that we live next to excavators and we live in a community that will tolerate this. So I ask for your consideration. Um the other questions that I that my neighbors and I would like to know is um how long you extend approvals. this is something that's going to be happening. Um, and

how do you plan on communicating with the residents of Whitehead Place going forward about this development and what the future is going to happen? Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. I I have it. I've seen it. Uh, next please. So, I also live on Whitehead Place and I would just like to um not just know those kind of things, but um have consideration for what the residents of Whitehead might expect in return for any potential approvals of this application again after at least 10 years of uncertainty. And I know some of our residents have attempted to sell their home recently and have lost a significant amount of money as a result of that development and it's delayed. They had a lot a lot of interest for their home and they um and no one wanted it as a result and they have lost $50,000 from the initial asking price for their home. So, we would also like to know what we as residents can get back from

either the developer or the city of Cowwood if the rest of us would like to sell in the short term or even the long term since this has been at least 10 years in the making. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next, please. Hello and good evening, mayor and council. My name is Nicholas Stanven. I'm here tonight on behalf of Abstract Developments and speaking to item 9.2. Uh that's the land use application for 3145 Mosen Road. I just wanted to thank staff and mayor and council for reviewing this item this evening. Uh we were asked to uh review and accept an amendment to the zoning bylaw which we were happy to do. Uh there uh our understanding of the purpose of the amendment was to clarify and confirm the maximum height for that proposed development and we were able to confirm that we can accommodate the three-story family-friendly town homes that we intend to bring forward to development permit which I understand will also be uh brought back for mayor and council to review at some point in the future. And

so we're happy to accept that uh amendment to the bylaw and we hope that mayor and council will choose to see that move forward this evening. Also in reviewing the draft work from the machosen corridor study, we are happy to see that the dedication we provided uh to the city of Cwood as part of our resoning application will accommodate the works that are planned in that right away. So, thank you very much for your consideration this evening and uh thank you for your time. Thank you very much. Next, please. And final call for public participation. You see none, I will close the public participation portion of this uh of this meeting. Now it's delegations.

Yeah. I'll again introduce Kathleen Schmaltz, president of arts and culture Cwood uh society. Kathleen um mayor and council staff and staff back there and citizens. Um I would like to just update you with what's happening at Arts and Culture Cwood and uh got a short presentation here. So, I'm here with our vice president, Mike Wyber, there and uh we have a new board and up and running. Um we have a new literary arts director, Rebecca Mccclure. And we have the former treasurer, Alana McFale, who's going to be um a liaison between uh members of the society, public, and artists about any questions or concerns that people have.

Despite rumors, uh, the open mic is alive and well. There were 29 people at this last open mic, um, at Goldfinch every second and fourth Wednesday. And, uh, this is Ally, if you haven't met Ally before, who runs the open mic. And we have an amazing exhibition on right now. Um, you can ask two of our council members about it. They were there at the opening with about 160 people yesterday. the Tao drummers and others um by uh artist Marlene Howell about the um Japanese internment in BC. It's a really amazing exhibition. We have a new group, the creators group. Everybody's welcome second and fourth Tuesday of the month.

Bring your projects and um get to know some people friendshipbased. And we have some collaborations coming up. one with path. Um the developers, they are choosing three works from the upcoming plan air exhibition that they're going to enlarge and put on um a big a big display billboard at 345 Ltoria. And uh our youth are collaborating with PATH at the moment um to paint a large mural with uh artist Isabella Portius. They just got started today. I think she was starting last week, but pretty exciting for them. And Arts Smarts will be continuing in the fall for students aged 13 and up. There's room for more.

So, if you know some students, that would be great. This year, we were able to have some part uh some short-term employees help us with the festival. So, this is our uh festival coordinator, Anthony Mensah, a master's graduate from Royal Roads from Ghana. and Akina is of Japanese origin and brings her design sense with her and she's working on publicity with Ally. Um festival is coming up September 11th and 12th. It's a free event. We will have um bike racks and uh shuttles, food trucks, performers afternoon of Friday and all day Saturday. 20 artist tents, beautiful indigenous showcase and um the Marin Council and other dignitaries will be invited to a special preview that I'll tell you about in a second here. So, the Banic Room is one of our food trucks this year.

Um, and this year we're going to have an indigenous showcase preview on the Friday afternoon and we're hoping to invite dignitaries who need to purchase gifts for uh, vis other visitors during the year so that we can really support those indigenous artists. Um for after the indigenous showcase preview, we are going to be rocking it out on the field with Latin Vibes 12piece music group. Um we have some local performance for performers returning. I'm not sure Al will be dressed like this, but he's coming back. Stut Romany group will be playing. Um and thanks to Reimagine who are sponsoring a cider press uh from um Wellland Orchard at the festival this year. Um so I wanted to just mention that our strength is in integrating arts ex art art the arts into experiences and this is our um program coordinator Sunonny Ba and this is her beautiful piece that she created for our uh show about Canada and uh it's a love song to Canada that we played at the opening of the show.

Sky Alexander is another one of the local musicians who'll be playing at openings and also at the festival. And we're hoping to collaborate with a group that you may have heard something from, Roots and Rhythm Soul R&B community nights for seniors. Super fun. Classes are planned until the end of August. Now, Sunny is starting to work on the classes for the fall, and we are growing and getting better at what we do. Um, over the next month, check out the activities on our website. And uh I just want to mention [clears throat] before the end here that we're very excited to find out that we received an $8,000 um dollar grant in collaboration with the city from the Victoria Foundation to help with our um paid bookkeeper. We're just as we're growing, we're finding we have to move out of total volunteerism and towards some paid staff. So that's all I got for you.

Thank you very much, Kathleen. That's a great presentation. I'll just open it up for questions from council. Any any questions, council? Oh, Mr. Grove. Thank you, Mayor. How How old do I have to be to be a senior? You know, I don't know if they're going to check us at the door, but isn't that a fun concept? I I really hope that that comes to pass. It's not really a question. I just want to thank you for the growth that I've seen in this uh organization and it's such a wonderful site. There's all kinds of exciting things growing I can see and coming from it. So much more potential.

So I really think that this year is a big step in the right direction and we're can look forward to a lot more coming and the festival Esats and Beats is a big uh or the uh art sorry arts festival uh is a nice partner to the Eats and Beats event right it's just more and more we're supposed to be u this worldass seaside community and I think that this starts to show what we can This year it seems like a lot more cultural collaborations are coming our way as well and that is super exciting for us. So yeah, thanks. Thanks a lot Kathleen again. Super job. Well done.

Oh, yep. We can do it this time. I'm just going to consent agenda. Go ahead. I just wanted to ask that 7.3 uh be pulled for discussion. I did. Oh, already. Yeah, it's 8.5. I listened to you earlier today, Cynthia. Okay. H at this point time we'll come to the consent agenda. We did remove 7.3. It is 8.5. Uh is there any other items that council wishes to remove? If not, can I get a a motion, please? Thank you, councelor Jensen. Second, council Wilson. Discussion. Seeing none, call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, we'll move on to section 8.0. New business. Uh 8.1 is the intensive residential development permit official community plan amendment project initiation. Over to you, Mr. Mr. through the mayor to uh council.

This is the intensity residential development permit official community plan amendment project and initiation. the recommendation. Council has already received this with the adoption of the agenda, so the motion isn't required per se. Um, this is just a project initiation and giving council the background to how this project will start and we're here to answer any questions that council has and uh, Miss Bosenworth will answer the questions. Is there is there actually a presentation? No. Okay. Uh just open up questions for councel. See that can I get a motion please? Okay. Thank you councelor Olson and councelor Grove. Discussion seeing none. I call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none. Motion carries.

Thank you. Move on to 8.2 is the RFP award uh PWK 26013 public works modular office in washroom buildings. Over to you Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. The recommendation is that council award request per proposal 26013 public works modular office and washer buildings to lane one homes in the amount of $678,290 for two structures providing operational and office space for the public worksh. Thank you worship. Uh, I guess my only question is, uh, how does this, uh, fit with our upcoming, uh, revamping of the, uh, public works complex as a whole, John? Uh, I mean, I hate to think we're building another lunchroom in another building a couple years from now when we do move forward with the redesign of the entire complex.

Sure, the chair, thank you for the question. So the portables that that you have before you tonight are a direct output of some of the space planning work we've done over the past several years. Ultimately there is a more wholesome conversation about facilities that we need to have about this site and with council. Um this is an interim measure that will buy us um several years and will provide um adequate washroom functional space for staff. Uh one of the key things that is it that it addresses those um immediate needs in terms of washrooms that sort of thing that has come out of this baseline.

Thank you. I mean that answers my question. Uh we can put this down the road a little bit. Uh as far as the the overall redesign of the entire complex, I'm happy to move the recommendation. Your worship I see. I'll yield to councelor. I'll circle back to you. council. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just a quick question. I recall when we were originally discussing this, um, is there a potential for us to recoup the cost on some of these modules? Can you just in the event that we do, when and if we do move forward with the p new public works facility, can this be resold, recouped, some of that cost through the chair? Thank you for the question. Um, one of the the [clears throat] benefits to this um, style of building is that it is modular.

It can be repurposed. It can be sold. It can be moved. And so it gives us a lot of flexibility in the future. And that was one of the reasons when we looked at the business case of lease versus purchase, it made a lot lot more sense to purchase because at the end of that time, we still have an asset that we can do something with. And so there is a cost benefit to uh, to purchasing in this instance. Thank you for that. Lots of growth. Thank you. This is great. This is two separate buildings. Is it side by side? So, and what's the square footage roughly? I'm just kind of curious if you're total square footage. We've had two facilities is around 2400 square feet.

Thank you. Yeah, that answers that for me. Thank you very much. And I know you need this space. We got a tour there three years ago. The ladies need a change. Councelor Jordan, I just uh Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to ask um how long the modular units typically last like I know you the ones that you're in currently are quite old but yeah thank you for the question. So the life of a modular unit can be north of 20 years um with the right care you know they can they can last for quite a while. The one that we're replacing for example is from the late 1970s. So they do have a decent life. Thank you, councelor Day.

Thank you. I just wanted to say that I'm quite happy to support this even though it seems like a lot of money if you just look at the outset for the cost being uh as much as some small apartments or goodsiz townhouse some places. But uh it really does have multiple purposes and a longer lifespan and addresses our immediate needs. So I am supportive of this uh award of uh contract. Thank you very much. And I will circle back to you councelor Jensen for your motion. Go ahead council. I'll make the recommended motion. And thank you. Thank you very much. Second, please. Council Grove. Uh discussion, further discussion. Seeing none, I call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Thank you very much.

Okay, we'll move on to 8.3. Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. This is the intern development permit moratorum pending official community plan amendment. The recommendation is that council place a moratorium on form and character development permit requirements for developments containing four units or less including developments on lots less than 550 square meters pending completion of the OCP amendment. Uh council has provided us direction to remove that from the official community plan. This would just put into place that moratorum while those bylaws are still progressing because they do require four readings of council. Council has heard from members of the community that are building homes and currently the process is uh costly and really what we're trying to achieve out of form and character development permit for single family uh likely wouldn't be recognized and it's just another layer of uh requirements that council has said that you no longer wish. So this pro put puts this into action rather than waiting for the uh fishing plan amendment.

Thank you. questions. Uh, councelor Jordison. Thank you, Mayor. Um, to staff, I just um I wanted to ask how much time it normally takes to process a development permit and what amount of volume has there been lately? Thank you very much. So, um, development permits for these intensive residential developments, so typically a single family with a secondary suite are more minor development permits. We typically require a two-eek referral process. So, um we look for issuance between four to six weeks for these types of development permits. Um we have mentioned that we are anticipating a large increase in volume in these types of development permit applications given development um occurring in beachlands for single families. Um the majority of those lots would require this development permit.

So, we're looking um up to 150 applications and so this is eliminating that requirement and um reducing the amount of time and cost that staff have to spend on those applications. Thank you, Mari. Um further to that, um like for example, the beach lands already has guidelines in place. Um so it should be pretty streamlined when it gets to you. So I guess I'm just trying to understand what problem we're trying to solve here. Yeah, thank you. So, the intensive residential development permit area within the OCP requires these form and character development permits for lots less than 550 m squared. That is really in an effort to regulate small lot developments. Um the design guidelines that apply for this are typically around providing pedestrian access to secondary suites. Um, there's some lighting and landscaping design guidelines. Um, I would say there are quite limited design guidelines specific to single families.

Um, this development permit area also applies to our town homes as well. And so there's quite um a variation of housing forms that it applies for. Um, in other areas in the city, we do not require this type of um, form and character development permit. And then on lots over 550 meters squared, we would also not require that form and character development permit. Um, and so it is really for these small lots. I would say at the end of the day, regulating um, the form and character of single family homes is not best practice. Um we're seeking to streamline development approvals here and which really is the ultimate goal of this.

So just uh further to that um if the moratorum is passed um what is the impact to the bottom line in terms of revenue and what services does the city plan on cutting to make up for it? Thank you. So, um, development permits have a a base fee and then they have a fee based on a gross floor area. Um, so we would not be getting those development application fees, but we would also be removing the amount of staff time that is spent on these applications. Um, this application is referred to every department like a resoning is as well. So, um, I would say that is the tradeoff. We're not getting those application fees, but we're also not spending the time on them either.

Councelor Ch. Thank you, worship. So, for the sake of clarity, this moratorum will help those four young people build their homes sooner. Is that right? That's correct. They'll just proceed to building permit. Thank you. It would uh be a shame to think that we cost them any additional funds. It's already hard enough out there. Thank you, worship. Thank you, Councelor Day. Thank you. I just wanted to check in on um this is also protections for neighbors that um you don't get that really ugly, inconvenient uh secondary suite right next to you inconveniencing you as well. So how are we managing communication to the community about what is happening staff?

So these um applications would proceed to building permit um which I believe is posted online when we receive building permit applications. Um there's no notice requirement for building permits though. I'm just thinking um I I think we should keep our eye on the ball on these ones and uh take note especially if there's any conflicts that arise within the community. You know, if we have people come in and tell us that they're unhappy with some development that's occurring next to them that's got a building permit but didn't have a form and character permit, for example. We're familiar with our uh big pre-approved uh development areas going forward with a particular plan. So, this is opening a door to builders that may not know what we're expecting to see from them. So, I just want to be sure that we keep our eye on it to make sure that everyone is protected, not just the new people building a new house, but also the person who just invested their life savings right next door. Thank you.

Uh just a clarification, uh Mari, u did did you not get direction from council to do this in the first place? Correct. Okay. So, where we argue about that? It just seems silly. Uh anyways, okay. Um it it's it's a a moratorum please. Thank you. I'm speaking um and so if you you're asking asking for a moratorum um and and the only other last question I have to make sure is this is a deviation from the OCP right and uh so are we okay legally we can do this? I just want to make sure. So the moratorum is in place in the interm while staff are undergoing the amendment to the OCP.

Yeah. So we can do this legally. This is a policy decision of council. Thank you very much. That answers my question. And if I can just clarify as well, council did uh pass a motion um having a moratorum on development applications in the Tamarak area. Yeah. And that is something that we're processing to bring forward to council in August. So council has made these sorts of uh recommendations in the past and motions not recommendations motions and uh this is similar to that policy. Thank you very much. Uh councelor Jordison. Thank you mayor. I just want to make a statement before anything's taken out of context. Um questions aren't arguments.

So I think we are all just asking questions. No one's arguing anything. Thank you. Thank you. Uh seeing no other I need someone to move make the motion. Okay. Thank you very much. Councelor Jensen motion. Seconder. Councelor Olsen. Discussion. Call the question. All those in favor? None. Any oppos? Oh, any oppos? Any opposed? Seeing none, motion in favor is unanimous. Thank you. Okay. Uh 8.4 is uh service review and budget 2027. Councelor Jordison, if you want to motivate, please. Thank you. It's your uh notice of motion from last council meeting. I'm sorry. Sorry. Oh, yes. Certainly. Please. Could you put it up, please? Thank you. That's a good point. Thank you.

Yeah. So, so thank you. that was it's just that uh for staff to um come back uh with the service review and budget development framework process in at the August meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Uh motion made second, please. Thank you, councelor Day. Discussion. It's pretty self-explanatory. Thank you very much. And I'll call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Thank you very much. We'll move on to 8.5 which was 7.3 um which was the uh transportation safety initiatives program 2026 project priorities and I I just uh I pulled it from the uh consent agenda because I had a note from councelor Ward and he made a a good point very good point and and and in defense of the uh ISC when when you were guys were considering considering this [clears throat] you hadn't approved we hadn't approved the dog park yet. So with that change now um the suggestion now has been should the crosswalk you know um should the top 10 just is suggesting one of the priorities change is we move the uh lighted crosswalk from

Hatley crossing the chosen to uh Kenny Court crossing the chosen because of the trail now and the dog park sort of made sense to me but uh Um, and so it's a a consideration now. Um, I don't know if the best thing is to send it back to IC and going back and forth or what what the best idea for this is, but that's that's the issue that is brought up right now. Councelor Day, please. You're smarter than me on this one. So, um, I just wanted to make really clear, uh, because it took me a while to wrap my, uh, head around it. Uh but the transportation safety initiatives program, these are all um projects that have been identified by residents through our website coming forward to staff saying, "Hey, I think we really need a crosswalk here or a sidewalk there or these are all um programs that have been brought forward to staff from the community." And then they have taken all of those and run that through our matrix if I understand it all correctly.

It's sort of coming back to me now. Uh and then come up with our top 10. We've identified a budget um every year to try to work on things that the community asks us to work on because we all have our things that we're trying to work on. we're transportation corridors and other initiatives, but this is specifically to say, hey, the community came forward and said, "We need something here." And and so we've identified it. But since that uh came forward to the committee, I've heard even from a couple of the committee members uh mentioning that, hey, doesn't it make more sense if it was further down because of the new dog park and people got to get across the road? It makes a lot more sense for future um park accesses and amenities that are going to be on the other side of the road as well. So I think um it it will be beneficial uh to all parts of the road. I think having a lighted crosswalk, having a a definite opportunity to cross the road. Um maybe

next year. Uh we'll be back at uh at the intersection that was already put forward by the committee. willing to move it forward with the uh right away if if we're able to uh get working on it prior to our August meeting. But if we're waiting until or after our next transportation committee meeting, perhaps it should be included on the agenda to give the the community and our committee members an opportunity to weigh in. So, I'm personally fine with either way because I'm very aware of a long history of accidents, deer, and other animals being hit on the roadway. The top of Machosen Road Hill there is a really difficult area to manage. Um, and it will slow traffic down coming into the rest of that area. Um but uh happy to take it back to committee or go straight to Aira. I just wonder if staff could let us know does is it likely to be moving forward um before the next opportunity to meet with the transportation and infrastructure

committee or um maybe it's better to go there. Thank you through to councelor day. Um we're working on actively working on solutions for those 10 uh projects. Uh we do have uh budgeted funded funded budget uh for those works. Um absent a specific resolution this evening then we are intending to spend funds as directed by the committee if you were to adopt the committee's recommendation which is to move forward. So we would place that crosswalk on Hatley as opposed to the chosen certainly you have a a funding aotment I think of in excess ofund,000. So you could add this project and it might mean a different project in the top 10 gets dropped off. Um we could come back to the committee and and relook at it. So we're open to suggestions uh whichever way you'd like to proceed.

So my uh what I'm taking from that is you're ready to go but not ready ready right now. So, uh, [laughter] I'm I'm going to suggest that I I think the right thing to do is to put the crosswalk where people are going to be exiting from the dog park right now because we're doing something right there and it's going to be an activated area and uh I could be wrong and maybe we'll be coming back with another request for another lighted crosswalk at Hatley, but um if council is amendable, I'd like to put that forward that we just move the planned uh crosswalk from Hatley to Kenning Court.

Thank you very much. Do I have a second there, please? Thank you, councelor Johnson. Uh discussion. Oh, councelor Ro, please. Thank you, mayor. Um I would just like to uh add I have no objection to the crosswalk at the dog park trail connection to Beachlands. Uh however uh having raised two young boys on Graten and seen many other children cross there's angster of that crossing not even so much Hatley uh across Machosen but from uh Graten across Hatley uh if they're heading to Sangster they're obviously small and young and cars do come off that right turn at a high rate of speed. uh always frightened me and uh was caught out more than once on my way walking to the bakery at 2:30 in the morning by cars, believe it or not, at that time of night doing that slip lane turn racing turn down there.

So anyway, if that is a a spot for just it wouldn't I don't think it would be need to be lighted, but there a consideration at least given if this crosswalk is to be moved, that means there would be continue to be nothing there. And I would just like to add just from that personal experience I think uh I saw a lot of it and um I don't think a really expensive solution needs to happen there. However, it would be a consider perhaps even if it's down hat away from that from the chosen road a little bit. So that would be a way make me feel better about removing the hat cross but sense to put it by the dawn part.

Is that a crosswalk that's already identified too though in your matrix? I don't kind of recall it. It was such a long page and a half or so. So I could perhaps find a resident to put a request in either to your list. Go ahead, John. Thank you, worship. Just just getting a flashback to a couple other meetings. Mostly good memories. I believe this issue came up. We had a a lady come forward and asked for this crosswalk at one of our public participation meetings. Um, and again, I apologize. I don't dig into the details of a lot a lot of these 80 projects until we kind of get near the end. And I think this particular crosswalk is just a painted crosswalk across Hadley at Graten. So that's fairly cheap. And I think we can just do that. And then the machosen one to actually cross machosen. That one's probably going to be a bit of a bigger number to chew on. I I don't think it's going to be problematic with regards to the $100,000 funding. We'll have plenty there to do that and we'll look at the

matrix, but I think we can actually do the Graten crossing at Hatley and do the one at King County Court. Thanks very much. Clear. U going to call the call the question. I don't see any other discussion. All those in favor? Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Thank you very much. Uh we'll move on to um 9. Oh, no. We're finished now. We're at nine bylaws. Okay. Uh deputy corporate officer, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um item 9.1 call with land use bylaw is in front of council for first second and third reading. Uh the motion that's there is that council give for second and third reading to call with land use bylaw number 151 1989 amendment number 227 SN SS MU bylaw number 2091 2026 and staff Kelsey and Murray um the manager of planning are here should you have any questions for second and third reading. Correct.

Are questions for staff? Seeing [snorts] none, I'll look for someone to move, please. Thank you, Council Grove and Council Olsen. Discussion. Seeing none, call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Thank you very much. 9.2. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh 9.2 is back in front of council today. Um there are two motions uh for council's consideration. The first one is that council give land use bylaw number 151 1989 amendment number 220 CD 43 3145 M chosen road bylaw number 2054 2025 third reading as amended and if council passes that then we can go on for adoption as amended. Uh question and once again council uh staff is here Kelsey is here and are here for any questions. Okay. Uh, councelor Jordison, please.

Um, I just wanted to Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to say that um the Mosen corridor uh approach has not been decided or approved yet and neither has the TMP um been finalized. And I just think that today's zoning decisions could significantly increase the cost of any future road expansion. We need to ensure that land use decisions and transportation planning are aligned. Um, and I just feel that um, approving buildings closer to the proposed right away has potential to materially increase the future costs and complexity of the corridor improvements. And um, so I just can't support this development. There's also like I I I do have a question about the orphan properties in between the triangle that is created. It almost feels first that 3157 needs to be here for approval first prior to 3145 because of having to cross over. Um I'm wondering if the culdeac could be removed off of 3157 I think it is which would be able to be able to push the buildings back further um and not re require that. But then there's

the orphan properties that are in the middle there. If they're not able to access off Mosen Road eventually, how are they supposed to access uh how are you supposed to get to those properties? Uh thank you. Um so the properties within the middle of the triangle are not impacted by this development. they still retain their access off of Machosen Road. Um we are in active conversations with the applicants for 3157 Mosen Road. So they will be um coming to Planning and Land Juice um potentially September, maybe October. So they are actively advancing that application. Um in terms of the timing of the applications, we just bring them forward when the applicants submit the complete application and we're done. our um internal process. So um it just so happened that 3145 came first, but um the the zone is certainly enabling development for both of those properties, 3145 and 3157 Mosen Road.

I just furthermore, I just think that just pushing it back and taking a unit off now is going to save um taxpayers money in the end so that you're not uh tearing down a town home and uh you know demolishing it after the fact because we need the roadway. Um but I'll leave it there. Thank you. So it it's uh if if I understand uh when the question was answered in an email if I do understand this because we're talking two different things here we're talking development permit and zoning right now right but they are related in a sense here because if you know that the rightway is going to be 25 meters or 30 meters shouldn't we just be taking the worst case scenario and and I I think this is where it's unclear because you have a bunch of um drawings, right? Which throw me right off because if you if you look at it and I I read the email that came

in on it, I the person's right. It looks like there's a half a meter um uh setback, you know, if we were to go 30 or 25 meters, I forget which one it was. And you know, that's all I know. That's all I can see, right? and and that's so I I was having a hard time with your explanation to understand that like why wouldn't we if you know because that the the setbacks are um a DP issue and the zoning is a zoning issue but you know we have to go in there with our eyes wide open I guess is what I'm trying to say right now if we know that the if the right away is is it 25 mters or 30 mters for the four lanes 25 mters I think we're currently only a 25 m. Okay. So, shouldn't we just take that into account to make sure that they're not encroaching? Like we're not building a a townhouse unit that's, you know, basically half a meter from the road. I

guess that's all I think that's the point that was trying to be made. Am I explaining this correctly? Thank you very much. Okay. So, that again, like I said, it's just I thought that was kind of strange. Can you help me with that one, John? uh concerning the 25 meter road right ofway. Yeah, I believe the setback there currently is a 3 meter front yard setback which uh is outside of the 25 meter right away. So if you agree with the 25 meter rightway, it will be a 3 m front yard setback. Okay. Right. So it stays that way. If you go to 30 meters, if you decide you want to have a 30 meter rideway as it currently sits, if you left everything the same, then you would have you'd take 2.5 of the extra 5 meters on that side of the rideway and then it would be within 0.5 meters. That's if you went to a 30 meter right away in that area. Does that make sense?

That does make sense. Okay. Um, councelor Day, please. Thank you. Uh, I'm very concerned about this property and the setback and my reasoning is that when we look at our Machosen Road cross-section, I'm just looking at the handout that one of our committee members brought to uh, council today, earlier today. It accounts for a lot of things. Sidewalks, cycle lanes, travel lanes, turning lanes. Doesn't count for transit, though. and we are building restrictions into our most restricted part of the machosen road corridor when we approve a zoning with um the buildings that close to our road right away. So I I am very concerned. This is the part of the road that is going to have both the the flow from further south in Cwood along the Mosen corridor also has all of the traffic flow from Wishart Road coming up into it. because also the traffic from any side roads that are able to connect to it is likely to have um more densification in the future as we're

seeing come forward here tonight. So, I'm not uh comfortable with how close the actual buildings are to our road right ofway and that we don't have a plan uh for all of the things that we need in that road rightway. Um we've been trying to get there. I know it's a lot of work to get to the transportation master plan being really fully thought out and our quarter being understood. But even in the materials that were presented from our consultant earlier today, I can see things in that road right of way that I I'm going to need to verify um going forward. So, I'm just really concerned that that's a very important route. uh in Cwood for all of the development that is taking place and I don't want us to be short changed. So as it stands I haven't been presented with any um sufficient information to say that this is not going to be a problem in the future. I think we're creating a something that we're going to

have to work around in the future and uh that is not how I think we should be doing it. Comments staff. Thank you worship. Uh at this time as referred to the consultant, we we don't have a right of way. I mean um we know it's constrained and machosen from Ltoria all the way to Sou. Um my concern is though why do we go with that right ofway and I do know some of the counselors were on the tour that we took several homes in that area um will be just as close to this right away or certainly uncomfortably close. so much so that their drivers will be unusable at a 30 meter ride ofway. So, as the consultant said tonight, I think some of the issues with regard to a constrained uh right ofway we can deal with. Um, if you think about five lanes of traffic, for instance, left turn lanes and then two travel lanes. Even at 3.5, that's 17.5 meters, leaving you 7.5 meters for

a multi-use pathway perhaps on one side, a sidewalk on the other, only a multi-use pathway. But if you're actually thinking about putting transit lanes in there, then that certainly wouldn't happen. So, that would be a limiting factor. I mean on Souk Road, we're taking 30 meters actively from all developers and we're also um trying to take 2 meters right ofway to put the sidewalks outside of that right ofway to perhaps have the potential to have transit lane someday on souk. So certainly at 25 meters I would say that your your constraint that would be tough to avoid unless you went stayed with your two-lane configuration would be you wouldn't have dedicated transit lanes but the rest of it could probably developed through a constrained um rightway scenario like we talked about with the consultant sorry you sneaked up on me there worship um quite frankly u I mean there's a lot of hair splitting here I I don't have the education that our staff have uh and certainly a proponent has people working

on his team. There's a high degree of comfort on the part of our professional engineering staff. I see no reason to question this and I'm happy to move the recommendation. Your your worship. Thank you. Thank you. Uh okay. Uh we'll get a second, please. Thank you, Councelor Jordison. And so we got a motion on the floor. Councelor Day, please. Okay. Um, so I I'll just say that uh the transit doesn't need to have a lane to need space. There currently are bus stops on that road and we're talking about not taking the transportation corridor that we need because there's an existing home there that may be inconvenient. I would suppose that is probably more likely that those homes that are close to the road won't be the same homes that are there in the future.

Uh council hasn't batted an eye over a home built in, I believe, 2008 that's being torn down for new development in the Lator Valley. But um you know we're talking about a a little rancher with a very short driveway or you know there there is going to be change. I'm just trying to make sure that what we put in place today doesn't have to be changed tomorrow. Um that and and I recognize that I may achieve um areas where there's right of way and areas where there isn't sufficient rightway. We we have got that in this quarter, but we have to at some point in time start planning for the future and for what we're actually going to see on that corridor. And if you want to have rapid transit to go to South Colwood, you're going to have to find a way to make a loop. And if you make that loop through Langford, nobody's going to take the bus because it's going to take too long.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. if I could. Um there's just a motion on the floor currently to uh do third reading. I'm just going back to the minutes from the 29th and councelor Day put in a referral u back to staff. So we would s we didn't actually council did not pass to resend third reading because this is back as amended as a bylaw. So you just need to resend third before you vote on third. I just wanted to interrupt just in case you got to voting on what's on the floor. Thank you. Okay. Uh, can I get a second on the recent thank you councelor um ro please?

So now can you put the motion on the screen please? Okay. And I'll go to councelor uh Jordan please. Okay. So on the motion or just sorry on the reset. Okay. Um I just the OCP identifies M chosen road as an arterial road. It's intended to become future frequent transit corridor. So we do need to have room for buses and we certainly need to plan past 2045. Um, and I guess my question is amending the CD43 zone setbacks also affects the applicants and their plans. However, the applicants are fully aware of the development permit guidelines affecting their properties. It should come as no surprise to the applicants if a change is made to make the setbacks consistent with the OCP development permit guidance. Is that not the OCP development permit guidance currently to have the the setbacks?

Thank you. Um so this before you this evening is a resoning application. As part of a resoning application, we assess the application against the land use designation. The land use designation within the OCP is the neighborhood designation which um enables development for town homes up to three stories with a number of other policies associated with that. This is a resoning application which allows us to develop regulations that fit the constraints of the site. And so as part of a reasonzoning application, yes, there are recommended setbacks within our design guidelines which are a guideline at the time of development permit. We do not necessarily review those at the time of reasonzoning because a resoning application allows us to enable sightsp specific regulations.

Um at the time of development permit um or development variance permit is when we may look at those recommended sideback um sorry setbacks within the design guidelines. So this is not the time where we um necessarily look at those recommendations because this is a reasonzoning application. Um any other Sorry, I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just trying to understand. So if you have a resoning application, do you not consider what road rightway is required for the arterial road that services it? So the development of this zone was always based on the premise of a 25 meter rightway. That 25 meter rightway is within the proposed zone. Um it does have a section machosen road dedication.

This particular applicant has already dedicated their road dedication because that was a requirement prior to adoption which is what is being considered this evening. So we are already um have retained that road dedication to enable a 25 meter rightway. Okay. So we the only motion we have on the floor is the very first one. Correct. So let's uh let's proceed on that and then I'll take motions for the rest. Is that recommended? Thank you very much. Uh any other discussion on the motion on the floor which is the highlighted uh motion? Seeing none I'll call the question. All those in favor and opposed council day councelor Jordison. Okay.

And uh someone want that. Can we do the next two together? Okay we can. Oh yeah, you have the adoption right. So should be something right. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Did you get that discussion? Sorry about that. Cert. Thank you. So, um I'm just trying to figure out if we uh are moving this forward with accepting the 25 m road rightway dedication from a chosen road. Uh when will we consider whether or not that's sufficient? like I'm I'm looking ahead thinking if this changes as we develop a plan for the roadway and then we would then change our mind and perhaps decide that we're going to need 30 mters for this portion of Machosen Road. Um, how would that come forward?

I would say that under that scenario, council has a right to list a width for the right of voice. So, for example, I can't remember if it was this council, the previous council you worship, I'm sorry. Um, we made the decision to make souk a 30 meter rightway. That's correct. That allowed staff from that day forward to ask developers to give us that kind of rightway. So, moving forward, if council decides sometime in the future, the future could be the next meeting, it could be 15 minutes from now. If you decide to go to 30 meters, then staff will act according to that. With regards to the decision tonight, if you decide on 25 meters, then moving forward this particular property and many like it will be a negotiated outcome with regards to getting that land unless they're developing. Once they develop, we'll take the land as part of that development. But until they develop, if we wanted to try to do that work, we would have to have a negotiated outcome.

And I won't spell out the forms of that negotiated outcome, but we do have the tools to take the land as we need it, such as just buying the land outright, or we could buy the property itself. And and if we go to 30 meters, there will be instances where it would mostly make sense for the city to buy the entire property and then reutilize it in some form. Does that help? So, Mr. Mayor, I'm just going to suggest that uh I think this one property is caught in the middle of a decision that I think is important for the city uh to come to terms with and that is the portion of the road that even according to the most recent information that we have is going to need the most width.

Thank you. U Mari, you want to say something? Yeah, thank you. Just to add, as part of the province's um suite of housing legislation, another new bill is bill 16, which allows municipalities to take road dedication at the time of building permit. And so this is a new um allowance for local governments where we formerly were only allowed to take road dedication at the time of subdivision or reszoning. And so this is just giving us additional flexibility. So I just thought I would add that. Boy, there's a lot of risk there. Council, okay, this might be a a silly question, but currently the last council dedicated the lanes to um that area to 30 m, right?

Well, I I read that that they that they've agreed that that would be 30 m somewhere. There was a resolution. No, souk road. The chosen road s my recollection your worship is that we did bring a um study M chosen road north uh a few years ago for adoption. It's still in draft form. One of the uh choices in that uh study was to go to 30 meters, but that draft uh study was never adopted. I don't recall, I'm not suggesting you're wrong, councilor Jordan's, but I don't recall a mandate by council. Um when we were negotiating with these uh developers, our subdivision servicing bylaw had not been adopted at that time and we didn't have 30 meters on the chosen at that time as well.

Okay. Thank you. I just I I guess I just want to say like I'm not trying to be difficult here, but I don't want a home to be built that is going to be like right next to a roadway eventually. That's not quality home for anybody. It's not and and to wait to build stage and then tell the developer, "Oh, we're going to take that roadway from you." That's not fair either. So, I'm I'm just trying to get ahead of it now. I really think we're going to need the roadway and we're not going to have it and it's going to it's about money and it's going to cost taxpayers more to get it back.

Uh any other discussion on the motion? Interesting. Yeah. Um I will call the question then. Um I I'll do it the opposite way. those opposed and those four. So you got everybody every everyone's opposed except for councelor Jens [snorts] was going to go that way. So uh motion uh doesn't that fails. Okay. Uh I just said talk about the next one then. Are you moving on to 9.3? Sorry. Sure. council day. I would like to refer this back to staff to try to work I I would like to salvage this if we can if the developer is interested in working with us to achieve the the uh road right away and the setbacks uh necessary to make it a viable quarter.

Um, and I'd like to uh have staff bring back a recommendation to council for the corridor uh so that we can work towards a goal that we can all agree on. Great. That's good. Thank you. Um discussion. I like it. Council Grove. Thank you, Mayor. I think um I like that idea, this motion, and I would I believe I'll support it, but it seems to me in the dusty corners of my brain, there's uh something about someone said somewhere that this development if they would build one less townhouse, there'd be lots of room like we'd be past this discussion. If that's true, um that needs to be the way it goes in my opinion.

Thank you. Uh any other discussion? makes a lot of sense. I will call the question. All those in favor, that's unanimous. Thank you very much. Motion carries. Okay, we go on to 9.3. And at this time, uh I think someone wants to recuse himself. Councelor Grove, I'm going to leave the room because the uh 2120 is u family. Thank you. Item 9.3. Uh the motion in front of council is that council give first, second, and third readings to Callwood Mainur local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw number 598 2001 amendment number 185 L enlargement 310 3110 Ward Road bylaw number 2119 2026 and Cwood main sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw number 598 2001 amendment number 186 L enlargement 3155 Wood Park Drive bylaw number 2120 2026 and Collwood main local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw number 598 2001 amendment number 187 alas enlargement 3112 or 3112 Wood Park Drive by number 2121 2026.

Thank you very much. Move and second please. Thank you, Dr. Jensen and and Jordison. Uh questions, comments? Seeing none, um any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. We'll call in Mr. Ro again.

Okay. Uh next one. 9.4 please. 9.4 is in front of council. The motion is that council adopt Collwood main sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw number 598 2001 amendment number 184 leas enlargement 3391 Fton road bylaw number 2114 2026 and Cwood West sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw number 625 2001 amendment number 99 alas enlargement 3391 Fton road bylaw number 216 16, 2026. Uh move and second, please. Ro and Olson. Uh questions, comments. Seeing none, call question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Uh item 10 is notice of motion. Are there any notices? Uh they won't show up until August 24th anyways.

Okay, seeing none, uh at this point in time, I will uh there be no further business, I will adjourn this meeting and we'll go back into camera.