Transcript: Council - 24 Aug 2026

Hi there. If the person that has come in for public participation that says iPad can rename themselves, I'd appreciate that. Thank you.

Hi there, this is Marcy Lon from corporate services and I just wanted to ask the person who has come in as iPad to rename themselves please. Thank you.

Okay. Well, good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It's great to see a nice full house here. And uh I would like to call the regular council meeting for Monday, August 24th to order. Uh before I start uh we would like to respectfully acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional territory of the Luangan speaking people represented today by the Esquimal and Zongis nations. We're grateful to work, live and play in this very special place. Item two is approval of the agenda. And uh before I start here, uh I'm I'm going to I never like start with apologies because I know a lot of people came out for uh 420 Tamarak. Uh but uh some information became available late this afternoon and I just got a statement to read right now. Um before uh council proceeds with consideration of 4 420 uh Tamarak Road reszoning application, I'd like to bring um an administrative matter to council's attention. Uh residents within 100 meters of the radius of the property

were were notified by postcard that the proposed bylaw and related materials would be available for public inspection between August 10th and August 24th. Following the planning and land use committee meeting on May 4th, 2026, revisions were made to the proposed bylaw, including changes to regulate building height using both maximum in meters and stories. In addition, a new report entitled 420 Tamarak Road reszoning supplementary information following the planning and land use committee review was prepared. Staff has since determined that these updated materials were not included in the P for in the public inspection binder. That's the virtual binder that [snorts] was made available for review. As a result, members of the public may not have had access to all the information intended to be available prior to council's consideration of this application.

It is important that both council and the public have the opportunity to review the complete record before a decision is made. To ensure a fair, transparent process, I will be asking council this evening to consider deferring a consideration of the 420 Tamarak Road reszoning application to the next available committee of the whole meeting, thereby providing additional opportunity for public uh review, input, and discussion before council deliberates on this matter. So this is very important to this council transparency and I just want to apologize that uh not all this information was made available. Um CEO do you have anything to add to that please? No Mr. Mayor you have covered that off.

I think with this application a number of things changed from the time it went to the planning and land use committee which uh was a result of council's deliberations at 3145 machosen about story and height. So, the bylaw was amended to provide that clarity that council wanted and that wasn't in that package as well as the staff report that was put live uh with the agenda review on Wednesday of last week. So, neither of those were added to that uh binder uh as an oversight and with that being the case uh and a lot of the public comments that we received um it seems clear that that information didn't transcribe into some of those uh letters that had come back in. So, we bring this administrative matter uh to council.

Obviously, this isn't uh something that anybody uh likes moving forward. We're looking at our processes to ensure that this doesn't happen again. Uh from the perspective of uh council's time and the public's time and the developers time of bringing this forward. Um with that, your worship, these are the things that we will be looking at for service improvements moving forward. Um certainly duly noted and uh apologies on behalf of the administration for missing that key component. Okay. Thank you very much. Um I I have a proposed uh motion. Can you can you put that onto the screen and I'll get a I'll look for a move in a second here, please.

Sorry, Mr. Mayor. I don't have her prepared for the screen right now, but it is that item 9.2 2 420 Tamrock Road reszoning be deferred to the first available committee of the whole meeting. Thank you very much. Can I get a mover? Uh, councelor Day, please. Thank you. I'm happy to move that motion, but um I was hoping to provide the public with information on when that will be. I believe it our next available is August, not August, September 28th. [clears throat] This is new information that came forward this afternoon. I haven't looked at the agenda for there, but we will do our best to make sure that it's available at the next committee meeting. I don't have a date for you at this point. It's something I can confirm with both the developer and obviously in the public notices as that go out. Uh we just need the opportunity to look at the upcoming agendas and how that will fit in. Thank you. We can do a special also by the way.

Right. Okay. Can I get a second? Thank you, Councelor Grove. Uh discussion. Oh, councelor Jensen and then council war. Thank you, worship. And uh as disappointing as this might be, especially for the folks who attended, um I think the process is there for a reason. We do need to hold ourselves to account and I think it's apologies to the people who showed up including the proponents for this particular uh location. But can I get some clarity? Uh here it sits on an agenda for council and now we're not moving it to another council agenda. We're moving to committee the whole it might be a nuance but can I have an understanding of what the thinking is there?

Absolutely. Uh I'll tell you what the thinking is. Um there were a total of you know over 40 letters that were submitted. I think it needs a little more discussion and as you know committee as a whole allows that discussion to happen a lot freer than here at council because council is very business-like. So I I think you know but we can do a council meeting thereafter and do whatever we have to do. So I think well uh and I know uh the chief administrator mentioned it but uh uh you know what's on the agenda is important as well. So sticking this at the back of some voluminous agenda that's already underway would do it a disservice. Uh so um hopefully we can keep that in mind so we don't make people wait till 10:00 to hear what they came to hear. Right.

Thank you very much. Um seeing no other speakers I'll I'll just uh call the question. All those in favor? Any opposed? Uh councelor work. Okay. And uh now uh getting through that the that that that that motion passes. Uh so the the next um I'm looking for a mover and second that the agenda of the regular council meeting of August 24th be adopted as amended. Please move and second. Thank you. Councelor Grove and Councelor Troen. Okay. And uh discussion seeing none. Any opposed? Seeing none. Motion carries. Okay. Hey, I'm going to move on to item three, which is the mayor's message. I just have uh three messages this evening. Uh first of all, I just want to welcome everyone back uh from summer recess. I hope everyone had an opportunity to enjoy a little bit of time off with family and friends. And we only have uh two regular council meetings left here until the end of this term. And uh so uh yeah, I'll let I'll let people pile out here.

And uh my second message is uh pretty simple. I'm going to hand my the reigns over to councelor Grove who just wants to take a few minutes to update council on the community garden initiative. Council Grove. [clears throat] Uh thank you mayor. So we have uh under uh direction from council to pursue some uh uh uh community garden possibilities down the lagoon west park that has been taken on by the co garden society and working together. This is very early stages. I think that we have uh some time now to do develop a public engagement uh aspect to this project which will uh roll out hopefully fairly soon and the uh location, the style, the type, the size, all of those things need to be settled and discussed. So, I'm hoping staff can find that to fit and we can get to go going on that soon. Just wanted to let people know that that possibility existed. Thank you. Thanks a lot, David. It's uh it's great that you volunteered to take this on on top of everything else that you do. Thanks a

lot, Conver Grove. Uh the last thing I just want to say is um on the evening of August 13th, the Wander Lawn Bowls Club hosted its inaugural Merrill and Counselors Lawn Bowling Challenge. All five Westshore municipalities uh um councils were participated in this tournament. In brief, I'm happy [snorts] to say that and announced that the city of Cowwood represented by councelor Misty Olsen, councelor Ian Ward, councelor David Grove, councelor Dean Jensen, and me uh we won. We won. And uh you know I say the terms I use is through sheer determination, skill and true grit and a whole bunch of luck. But we get to claim the bragging rights as the winner. And uh I have Steve from the Wand Fuca Ults Club here. He wants to make a quick presentation. So Steve, please I'll let you I I think you want to have a word here. So go ahead. Please just have to push the button on the right on there. There you go.

Good evening. I'm Steve Schulhan representing the Wand Fugal Bulls Club. I am excited and thrilled to be able to uh present to the city of Cwood the first annual challenge cup. So congratulations and I very much look forward to seeing you next year when you return to defend your cup.

probably work.

So I'm going to move on to item four, adoption and receipt of minutes. May have a mover and secondary for the adoption and receipt of the minutes detailed in section 4 [clears throat] under recommendation. Okay, thank you. Councelor Olsen and Councelor Jensen, any errors or omissions? Seeing none, call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Okay, we're going to move on to item five, which is uh public participation. Uh we have uh we had 26 written submissions that were received prior to agenda publication and they're attached to the agenda. We also had 22 written submissions that were received after agenda publication and they will be appended to the agenda following tonight's meeting. In addition, they will be available on the cities of meetings website tomorrow. Just like to thank the public uh for their written submissions. I I was really impressed by the quality. Uh I finally got through them all. That was uh quite the quite the handful that we had this time. Uh

but all worthy of rating. Uh we have uh nine people that have registered to speak uh at uh public participation tonight. nine virtually. Is it is it nine virtual? That is virtual, but we do have uh a number of the people that have registered that were specifically here to speak about Tamarak. Um and we do have another one that's here on a different issue. Okay. Electronically. Okay. So, I know that uh we we've got a couple controversial um items on the agenda tonight and I I just want to just state something here that uh um I just like to remind everyone participating in public participation that uh we really truly welcome your comments and opinions. And I I just want to ask everyone to please focus your comments on the issue, the proposal or the concern and not individuals. I want to keep this as respectful as possible and uh uh you know we may disagree on the issues but we can and should do so respectfully and constructively.

So at this time uh let's start with the people virtual. Uh hi there. This is Marcy from Cydia Calwood. Uh the first public participation uh participants, Marlene and uh Peter, if you'd like to unmute yourself and address council. Thank you. Hello. Hi. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity. I'm Marlene. And I'm Peter Lewis. And uh we live on Triangle Mountain, 863 Kala Crescent. We've been there for 39 years. We have probably 30 to 40 really large mature fur and seed mostly fur and cedar trees. So, maple trees on the property. We don't like cutting down trees. We love We really appreciate that the city of Cwood has a tree protection uh policy.

We learned recently though earlier this month that two of our large fur trees have a disease. There's also a cedar tree that we haven't applied for a tree cutting permit on, but uh the fur trees we're going to we need to take them down first. Um we've hired a really wellqualified arborist, actually somebody who cuts uh does cutting for Calwood. And um so that bill is $2,500. And then when we were applying for a tree cutting permit, which we didn't know we needed to do, but when we applied, we also learned we have to pay another $750 a tree uh to cut down the tree. And uh if we replant, so we're delaying the cedar tree where if we replant two trees a year later, if they're still alive, we can get the $1,500 back. So the thing that doesn't work for us is um we think there should be a distinction. These trees are being cut for safety, not for profit, not for development, not for views. But if they

aren't cut and they blow down, and they will blow down eventually. It won't I don't know when, but they are going to blow down. Um, one of them is for sure going to reach if it it is going to fall towards the street and it's going to fall on hydro wires and probably actually reach the road as well. And the other tree might fall on our house. I don't know which direction it would fall. Um, so these are being cut for safety reasons. And we think that there should be a distinction um between charging uh for tree cutting uh if it's for profit or if it's for safety. It's it's a lot of money to come up with upfront. $4,100 the tree permit uh 7 uh $1,500 in tree uh cutting fees like the city of Cwood and then $2,500 to the arborist. It's a lot of money to come up with upfront.

Thank you very much. I've got to uh wrap you up here. That that that beep beep was your time. So I did let you extend, but message message received. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next, please. Sorry, Mr. Mayor. I believe a m the remainder of the people wanting to speak during public participation were specifically for Tamarak. So, I'm not sure if they still want to address council or not. Um, they might not be aware that it has been deferred to a future committee of the whole meeting. Yes, let's let's find out. I see that we still have people online, so I'm going to start off with um Shannon B. If you want to unmute yourself and you can go ahead and address council. Thank you.

Hi there. Um, good evening. Um, as you as you just said, my name is Shannon and I live on Whale Road, uh, 2721, uh, which is just a really short walk from Gamble Park and I'm a mother of three young kids. And, um, I know things have kind of changed track here, but I just wanted to, um, just mention that I'm here in support, uh, in support of the proposed development at Tamarack. Um, I want to focus on the park because that's what matters most to my family. Um, Gamma Park is a lovely green open like well-kept space. Um, um, but if you're a parent of young kids like I am, there's nothing really to actually do.

So, my kids and I just walk through it. We don't actually stay. Um, the playground upgrade, however, um, which is included in this project project would change that. Uh, real play structure would turn that whole area, Gamble Park, into a place families in this neighborhood would actually, I think, seek out and not just pass through. and uh especially cuz this isn't a private perk for residents um of the development. It's a public park upgrade. Um every family on Whale Road and Beyond could benefit from it. So uh beyond the park, I also think that this project is thoughtfully designed and fits with with what Cwood has planned for this area. Um and I support the housing that helps our community grow um for people who already live here. So I just want to say that and thank you guys so much for your time. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Bye-bye. Next. Hi there, U. Michael. Under public participation, if you'd like to unmute yourself and you can go ahead and address council. Thank you. I'm assuming you're meaning Michael Veramp. You got to bear with me because I'm just getting a cold. Good evening, mayor and council. My name is Mike and my wife Donna and I live on Sun Ridge Valley Drive. We've been in Cwood for over 20 years now. We raised our kids here and they're all adults now out in the real world. So, I want to be clear. We're not speaking tonight because this affects us directly. We're speaking because of what we think this project says about Cwood as a whole.

I think there's a pattern in how a lot of cities do this. Apartments and condos get built, sure, but they get pushed to the busy roads, the corridors, the places nobody really wants to live. And the message that sends, even if nobody says it out loud, is that people who live in apartments or condos, don't get to be part of real neighborhoods in the same way a house on a quiet street does. That's not something we ever really questioned until we saw this project. 420 Tamarak is different. It's not on a busy corridor. It's on a quiet culde-sac next to a park in an actual neighborhood. The same kind of setting Donna and I raised our own kids in. And I think this matters more than people realize. It says that this building is just as much a part of this community as any house on any street around it.

There's also a practical side to this that shouldn't get lost. 153 new households within walking distance of Callwood Corners means real everyday customers for the shops and businesses already there. That's not a small thing for the people who've invested in this commercial area. more people living close by is is how Calwood is how sorry is how that part of Cowwood stays healthy long term. Mike, I'm going to have to get you to wrap it up. Uh your time is uh expired. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thanks. Uh hi. Under public participation, Cara King, if you'd like to unmute yourself and you can go ahead and address council. Thank you.

Hi, good evening mayor and council. My name is Cara King. My husband Matthew and I live on Leila Place and I grew up in Cwood next to Marcy. Um, so this city is my home in every sense. Um, Matthew is a dentist here and I work alongside him as a dental hygienist. We get to chat with our patients quite often and it's remarkable how frequently the same thing comes up. Retirees wondering where to downsize, young adults wondering if they can afford to stay. The question [snorts] is always, is there room for us here? 420 Tamarack answers that 153 homes beside a park, walkable, built to fit in the neighborhood. Cowwood made room for us, so let's make room for the next generation, too. Thank you for the opportunity to be heard. Thank you very much, Ka. Next, please.

Hi there. under public participation. We have I believe it's Andrew. Uh go ahead and you can unmute yourself and address council. Sorry, it's Andrea. My apologies. Andrea Scott. No, I I believe that. Sorry, [laughter] that's not for public particip. No. Okay. So, thank you. We got everyone virtually. Then, uh we'll ask anyone here that's in attendance tonight to come on up and uh participate. Peace. Yes. Just so that you know the colors. There's a green light which means you're being timed. Yellow is you got 30 seconds left. And the red means you got to stop. Okay. [laughter] Yeah. Good evening, Mayor Kobayashi and Mayor members of council. My name is Margaret Hill and my husband Ryan and I are the registered owners of unit I won't say the unit in the Eliza B um condo in Royal Bay directly across from the proposed development at 3569 Ryder Hesto Way. We submitted a written objection to DVP 0019 on June 15th and I'm here to tonight to speak briefly to that

[snorts] to our concerns. First, I want to clarify one error. In my previous submission, I mistakenly referred to an increase of three six-story buildings. What I meant was the significant increase in permitted height as well as the increased overall size and massing associated with this variance. We've always been aware of the four buildings with the social building between them originally planned directly in front of Eliza and the future Bella complex. We were comfortable with that plan. We also have been aware of the smaller, less obtrusive building to be built on the corner and its position as shown in the rendering. What we did not anticipate was this variance introducing a substantial fifth building into our sight lines and eliminating the breezeway and openness that were part of the original vision presented to purchasers. The site would now contain six buildings, five sixstory buildings and one-story building, which would be the social house.

um that is a very different configuration from what was originally presented and it creates a much greater sense of density and enclosure along Ryder Hudgel. The images used to market Royal Bay showed a much smaller building in a different configuration with a breezeway and open space between it and the four larger buildings directly in front of us. from our corner unit. We believe that that breezeway [clears throat] would help maintain a sense of openness with the proposed changes that openness has taken away completely and I don't have so can I wrap it up? Yes. Okay. Um thank you. I'll talk quick. And the development will instead create a much more imposing wall of buildings directly across from our home which was not what we had been shown when we made the decision. Um I'll skip a bit here.

This isn't a vacant neighborhood waiting to be designed. We live there now. We are not opposed to path developing property. We are not opposed to growth in Royal Bay. We are asking council to make sure that the growth respects the neighborhood that's already there. These are the biggest buildings in Royal Bay and they're right in front of all the fourtore buildings. And I'm going to just not say what I said, but um it's just disappointing because it's actually ruining the look, the feel, and the character of the neighborhood. Thank you very much for your feedback. I press that. Yeah. Next, please. If you can push there's a little button there, right? You're Yes. Good evening, Mayor and councilors.

Okay, I'm here to talk about Eliza B as well. Um, and I just want to point out that um, we in Eliza B um, had these two brochures and also the Royal the the Bella Park brochures which clearly showed that the building that we were bu going to buy had um, basically um, laneways and plenty of green space and we were quite happy about that. Um, now we're finding that they're going to put wedge in a six-story building which is going to take away laneways, going to take away the equivalent amount of amount of green space and we we really object to that. Um uh you know um I I feel that in in this having been to some council meetings over the past couple of months um uh these new apartment buildings are getting a lot of families and they have a lot of children and they have a lot of pets as well. All the pets that we have in our building and they

need green space. They need grain space and and I think the the we should be encouraging familyfriendly communities and not trying to create a a a concrete jungle which which I believe this building is going to function. Consequently, I think it's very timely that your council is reviewing your OCP and that that that in doing that OCP, you should be looking at these family f friendly communities because um I think that as um Margaret was just saying, we really like living in in Royal Bay and we feel that we'd like to keep the the the atmosphere and the and the friendliness that's there at the moment.

I just want to say that you know we sent in 75 signatures were submitted to council and these are all people to wrap up. Sorry. Okay. These are all people who wish to deny this variation. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Good. Next. Next, please. Anyone else for public participation going once? Oh, Marcy. My apologies, Mr. Mayor. We do also have uh Mike Riley online that wanted to address council. Oh, that's that good looking dude there. Okay, sure. Mr. Riley. There we go. Thank you, Mr. Riley. Go ahead, please. Very funny. Uh, thank thank you, Mr. Mayor and Council, I was actually here for Tamarak, but uh after the terrific tree uh presentation, I've been hooked and I'm staying on.

I'll come back. Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, I will close uh public participation and we'll move on to item six, which is delegations. And I understand we have the West Shore Chamber of Commerce uh doing the presentation. We have the executive director, Julie Lawler, and she's joined by Kelly Darwin, the president of the West Chamber of Commerce. Welcome, folks. Over to you, Julie.

Oh, please. No, no, don't worry. I can always do it without if needs be. Couple seconds.

Okay, you ready? All right. Oh, I'm already on. Thank you. Uh, good evening, Mayor Mary and Council. Thank you for the opportunity to come to speak to you at a very busy time. I'm executive director Julie Lawler and as stated I'm here with our president, Kelly Darwin. And our purpose in coming before you tonight is to report out on the community service agreement we have with the city of Cwood as well as respond to some points we were asked to address, which of course we're happy to do. The next six slides each relate to a component of our community service agreement. So business support to start as indicated in the slide the Westshore Chamber provides general query response and referral and our e-news social media community calendar and website resources are open to all. We like to say that if we don't have the answer, we can find somebody who does. website resources include a page new for 2026 on business benefits and grants as well as our already standing resources for small business and information on working with

rural roads university students. If you're a member of the Westshore Chamber, you can also submit content for our e-news as Westshore Parks and Wreck have done for their 60th anniversary celebrations or have your news shared through our social media. As this is more generalized support, we don't track the callwood business impacts in every case. But if council is interested, I can certainly provide more data on callwood business news shared out through our e-news. The West Chamber's a clearing house of and a trusted source of information. Right now, we're getting ready to act as a conduit of information about support for businesses impacted by the most recent wave of US tariffs. Our membership with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce means we can effectively share this information out as quickly as possible. The Westshore Chamber convenes, facilitates, collaborates or supports in a whole range of areas that directly or indirectly support business.

For example, we've recently re reached out to the business community, both members and non for their input on a potential grant application that would provide skills training in areas that businesses identify as a priority. business promotion. I chose this slide as it shows our director Beum Earlas of Oasis Landscape Design of Cowwood business speaking to two other members at a networking event we had at Acera Insurance in Royal Bay. Over the last year, eight out of 30 chamber events have been held at Calwood organizations with this year's AGM and Mixer planned at the Children's Health Foundation. While our networking events are for our members, we always create spaces for people interested in finding out more and offer a non-member option for all of our ticketed events. This has included a futurep proofing your business lunch and learn offered by Ingred Vaughn of My Smart HR at the John Han campus in March and our 70th anniversary quiz night and dance party which is happening at the Langford Legion in September.

This slide is from the promotion for last year's joint event in November 2025. Since 2022, we've partnered with the city of Cwood on one or two prosperity roundt lunches per year, building on the online roundts introduced by Cwood during the pandemic. These have varied from generalized check-in conversations to more focused discussion on Callwood's value proposition and retail strategy. from our quarterly meetings with our liaison councelor Misty Olsen and CEO Jason Johnson. We appreciate that this year's event will be deferred into early 2027. So it turns out that I don't have a photo of the four of us meeting for quarterly leaison meetings. So I've included this photo of Mayor Kobayashi presenting at our coffee with the mayor event which took place earlier this year. Consistent quarterly meetings have really helped us work more closely together from events like this to discussing issues impacting Cwood businesses. As the current four-year term draws to a close, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank councelor Misty Olsen for her active leazison work with the West Chamber.

We share City of Cowwood information through our enews and social media as a preferred partner. Over the last year, we had over 40,000 emails open with a 5% click rate. Our open rate is 49% and we have a subscriber list of around 930. If council would like more details on what city of Cwood News has been shared, I can certainly provide more data. We can also send direct email to Cwoodbased businesses on our database on business related issues. This currently stands at 361 which we understand is about half of business licenses. So there is still a gap there. Best of the west shore. This slide shows two Colwood based businesses who are winners in 2025 with Island Junk Solutions on the right for best home or trade services and Trillium Westshore Village on the left for best senior services. Overall, 25 Collwood businesses were winners or finalists.

And this matters because it is promotion for and attention to these businesses. This contest is open to all businesses and nonprofits who have a location in the West Shore. Callwood Parks were also winners in three out of four community categories. Now that I've touched on the points of the community service agreement, I'd like to touch on some facts and figures. As you can see, our operating budget for the calendar year is just over $353,000. The majority of that is still based on memberships at 42%. If you compare that with 2024, you can see that our operating budget has gone up by 8% over two years and that is reflected largely of the increase in almost all costs. The comparison between the year the two years is like for like for budget areas with one exception. We have been unable to rent out areas of our building in 2026 as we have in prior years and have been fortunate in 2025 to bring in a wage subsidy through the Canada Summer Jobs Program. I've been

asked to report on membership growth and retention statistics. Membership was at its lowest in 2021 when we hit 333 members. Since then, we've been gradually increasing overall membership year-on-year, and as of today, we're at 425. However, this has been largely driven by new membership as our drop rate started to go up in autumn of 2024 and is a continuing trend. Reasons range from retirement to value to member capacity, and we will continue to refine what we do based on feedback. But make no mistake, things are challenging for business right now. I'm now going to hand over to our president, Kelly Darwin, to take you through the last couple of slides. Kelly.

Hello, Mary Council. As the city of Calwood considers its planning and budgeting for 2027, we wanted to recommend that one tool that could be of use is the implementation of business walks. Many chambers carry out these in partnership with municipalities for the benefit of both and we'd be happy to discuss that in more detail. You'll also be aware that Langford recently launched its economic development strategy and business walks is one of the initiatives we are discussing with them. This segus into a request for an update on the potential move to a new facility. Langford's economic development strategy specifies that the city of Langford's intention to relocate the chamber offices to a more accessible and visible location in downtown Langford to also allow for the full expansion of the Veterans Memorial Park and an important community asset. Negotiations continue and I expect we will have a more we'll be able to provide a more detailed update out to the community very soon.

The West Shore Chamber started life as the Cwood and District Chamber in 1956. And as we look back over the and celebrate our 70 years of service to our community this year, I'd like to express our thanks to the city of Cwood. That's my official thanks. I also want to throw in a personal one. Um, as I hit my final 10 years of being in the West Shore Chamber of Commerce or being on the board of the West Shore, I've been looking back at what my achievements have been. And over the past three years as I've been president, I think my biggest achievement has been enforcing the relationships or or strengthening the relationships that we've had with uh our municipalities.

And uh I think if we look back 3 years ago, we had a relationship with Gwood. And if you look back 10 years ago, maybe not quite as strong as it is today. So I would like to thank Mayor Kobayashi, Councelor Olsen, and CIO Jason Johnson for their devotion and their hard work in coming to the table, working with the chamber, and create creating a relationship that I hope will will last uh my term as the president of the chamber. Thank you very much. finished to take it the end. Okay. Uh I'll I'll open it up for questions from council. Any questions on the presentation? Uh councelor Jordison, please.

Thanks, Mayor Kobe Hashi. I just wanted to say thank you for the presentation and for the work you're doing with our business community. Um, but I am and I think the business walks proposal is really interesting because I think that's exactly the kind of direct information council could benefit from hearing about. But I guess um I'm just trying to understand what's behind the numbers more importantly like what co businesses are telling the chamber that they need from us. If you have any of that information Now the key thing there is what co businesses are saying and I I can say some of the things that we're hearing but I I think that one of the the reasons why uh I think looking at something like business walks would be extremely useful for council but also for us as an organization in order order to be able to respond is that businesses need a lot of different things and some of them we can uh we can address together and some of them are are larger than what we can do necessarily. Um you

know what we're hearing from businesses generally is about how challenging uh the cost of doing business is and that comes at different levels um from local up through to to federal. But in terms of specific call with businesses, it would probably be more along the lines of sort of one thing here and one thing here and one thing here. So I I I can always go back and look at what data that we have to provide you. But I also feel like because we don't have necessarily a direct line to callwood businesses, uh we know about them when we know about them, but they they don't opt in to have their information sent through to us, then we're missing an opportunity in terms of that conduit. Okay. Thank you, Julie.

Thank you. Uh council Olsson, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I had a similar uh sentiment as councelor Jordison. Um, and thank you for the presentation and it's been a pleasure working with you both and Kelly. I wish you the best on your next endeavors. It's been a delight. Um, I think the business walks are also a great opportunity for membership drive. Um, you know, way to to get new members on board with the chamber. So, and and this council seems to love data. So any kind of information that we can get even uh with respect to um referrals that are actually being made to the chamber members um and getting a better understanding of how you're um surveying your members uh would be would be great just to get a better understanding of the benefits that they're getting through the chamber. Um you know we yeah we love data but I do appreciate the presentation and I I've enjoyed working with you both. So thank you very much.

Thank you. I just will wrap it up here then. Uh again, um really appreciate you coming out, uh this evening, uh you and Kelly. That that's phenomenal. And you know, being a past president, of course, of the Chamber of Commerce, I I understand the frustrations that you go through. It's even tougher now than Well, I wouldn't say that was tougher. I think we had different challenges when I was the president. Um but, uh want to thank you for everything that you do for the community, for the business community. Uh, one of the questions I do have is, um, [clears throat] as we're trying to align our own economic development strategy. It won't be in this term. You know, the the new council will have that challenge. Uh, that's for sure. How they want to do business here. So, you know, I'd like to you you're going to play an important role in that because I certainly don't understand what your strategic strategic objectives are and we got to make sure that we're not crossing over each others or how we can help one another to tell you the truth.

So, I think that's really really important. So, I mean it's not going to happen uh in this term. We're almost finished here. But uh it is uh it is a strategic objective in our in our you know in our strategic plan. So do you have a strategic plan right now of some sort? Yes, we do. Okay. So are we going to can we maybe in the early in the new term when the new term joins can can we you know maybe get that presentation to the the new council? Absolutely. Okay. Great. And and my last question I have for you is um I don't quite understand what's happening. You just said you're getting kicked out of your building now, right? From I did not say that. [laughter] Okay. So I just you you had some hesitation here. So I I picked up on that.

I I mean I think the the point is that it's a there's a very clear statement in the Lanford economic development strategy and other than to say that there are no negotiations going on, we're not really in a position to say anything else publicly at this time. I understand. Okay. Thank you very much. I I picked up on that. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much again. Thanks, Julie. Thank you. Thank you. We appreciate it. Okay, we'll move on to item seven, which is the consent agenda. There's only two items on the consent agenda. Any member can make a request to move any item uh for the purpose of individual debate or discussion, and it only takes one person, and we move it. Uh, councelor Day, please.

Thank you. I'd like to um discuss the age friendly plan. Okay. We'll move that to 8.6 under new business. Okay. And okay, that's it. Uh, may I get a motion to approve the U consent agenda, please? Council Jensen and Council Olson. Discussion. Seeing none any object. Oops. Sorry. Uh, you're still hot. Wait, sorry. Oops. Any any objections? Seeing none, motion carries. Thank you very much. We'll move on to new business. Uh item 8.1 development variance permit number DVP 000019 3569 Ryder Hedge Way and uh Mr. CEO we get you to introduce us please. Thank you. Thank you your worship through the mayor and council. This is the development variance permit number DVP000019 for 3569 Ryder Hedge Way. Matt Blakeley, our senior planner, has an overview to provide to council the recommended motion for council's consideration. Is the uh coming from the this was in came from the planning and land use committee that council refer the DBP back to staff to work with the applicant to explore revisions to the proposed building use and design. Mr. Matt Bley will take council through the application.

Would you like full presentation? Right. Uh thank you mayor and council. Uh so the purpose of tonight's presentation is to provide a high level uh summary of development variance permit application number DVP 000019 for the property located at 3569 Ryder Headshaw Way. Uh more detailed analysis and supporting information are provided in the staff report. Okay. Uh so this site is approximately 3,099 square meters or 0.765 acres. It's located in Ltoria South Royal Bay at the corner of Royal Commons Road and Ryder Hedge Stallway. Uh it is within area two of the CD28 zone and the Commons neighborhood as identified in the notorious uh south sub area plan. The site is bordered by Royal Commons Road to the north, Ryder Hedgehway to the west, an internal lane and a fourstory mixeduse building to the east and the rest of the parcel B development site immediately to the southeast as you can see in the top right corner of uh the screen there. Uh on July 6th, 2023, the original development permit uh for

parcel B was issued. The approved development permit included four six-story apartment buildings, one four-story mixeduse building, and one amenity building. For context, the original development permit did not include the future park at the corner of Ryder Hedgehaw Way and Producer Way or the uh property uh at the corner of Royal Commons Road and Roger Hedgeall Way, which is the property that is subject to the current variance application this evening. Uh so the proposal envisions the construction of a 77 unit mixeduse development designed to offer a diverse mix of housing options and ground flooror commercial units along Royal Collins Road. Units will include onebedroom, onebedroom plus den, two bedrooms and two bedrooms plus den. Uh the two commercial units will contribute to the active street frontage of Royal Commons Road and align with the intent of the Commons neighborhood uh which is to be the commercial, social, and cultural heart of the Ltoria South area.

The building is proposed to be above two and a half levels of underground parking with a total of 88 residential, 13 visitor and six commercial parking stalls. The proposal fully complies with the parking requirements set out in the off- streetet parking regulations bylaw as well as all requirements in the Callwood land use bylaw with exception to the maximum building height that is the subject of the variance request today. In addition to the variance application, the applicant has also applied for a form and character uh development permit for the proposed site. Uh due to the variance requests being associated with the overall building height, the approval of the variance is required to make the de uh the current development feasible. Until that decision is made, staff cannot move forward with processing the development permit.

Uh in terms of the official community plan, the property is designated Seaside Village and is located within the Commons neighborhood as set out in the Ltoria South sub area plan. That sub area plan identifies this property as part of area 2, which is a 2.7 hectare mixeduse precinct intended to support the adjacent residential or sorry, support the adjacent retail core. Along the northern edge, the plan envisions a pedestrianoriented streetscape along common roads with ground floor retail and commercial uses and residential or commercial uses above. The plan anticipates building heights of up to four stories along the northern edge and up to six stories across the rest of the site. It also identifies an overall density of about 3.0 floor area ratio with the potential for additional density where the broader city objectives are achieved. Overall, the proposed development is consistent with that policy direction. It provides a mixeduse pedestrian oriented form along Royal Commons Road and then steps up to six stories toward Ryder Hedgeall Way

which reflects the height for framework established for area 2 and CD28 zone. Uh the proposed development has been reviewed against the requirements of the CD28 area 2 zone and is in full compliance with all zoning regulations with exception to maximum height. One point I want to flag at this stage is that the zone distinguishes between apartment buildings which may be up to 24 meters in height and mixeduse buildings which are limited to 15 meters. That distinction is the is central to the variance requests and I'll speak to that a little bit more in the staff analysis portion of this presentation. Uh so as I mentioned the applicant is uh requesting to vary section 10.33.5.2 two of college land use bylaw 1989 to permit an increase to the maximum building height for a mixeduse building from 15 m to 24 meters.

Um before I move on, I'll just uh pause here on the image. So you can see uh the four stories along uh Royal Commons Road on the left side of the screen and then it steps back approximately 11 and a half meters before it goes up again to uh the sixstory residential component of the building. Although the requested variance uh on paper appears uh substantial, it's largely due to the building's mixeduse classification rather than the overall form or height. The mixeduse frontage along Royal Commons Road generally remains within the 15 m limit except for a small parapit reaching 15.44 m while the residential portion is stepped back and reaches 21.64 64 meters below the 24 meter otherwise permitted maximum for apartment uses in the CD28 area 2 zone.

While the application technically seeks an increase from 15 m to 24 m for a mixeduse building, the added height is within the residential portion and is in the area where the greater height and density are anticipated in both the OCP and the zoning bylaw. The proposal maintains a four-story scale along Royal Commons Road and steps back before stepping up along Ryder Hedgehaw Way, consistent with the intent of the CD28 area 2 zoning. The upper stories are are set back well beyond the 1.5 meter minimum as I mentioned approximately 11 and a half meters which is intended to reduce the perceived height from Royal Commons Road aligning with the neighboring fourstory mixeduse building and supporting the OCP direction for pedestrian scale and appropriate height transitions.

facade articulation, a varied roof line and in individual unit articulation further reduces the massing and adds visual interest. Overall um staff consider the the variance technical in nature and have worked with the applicant through this application uh to design mitigating height or sorry to uh reduce the impacts of the height uh and think that the design mitigates the height impacts while advancing the objectives of the CD 20 28 area 2 zone the OCP and the south ltoria sub area In terms of public notification, a development notice sign has been posted on the subject property in accordance with council policy. The local government act requires written notice to be provided to all property owners and occupants who may be affected by the proposed variance in advance of the council meeting where decision on the development variance permit will be considered. Um, so these were sent out and uh prior to this council meeting, roughly two weeks.

Uh, so there's a few uh suggested options for council to consider. Um, I'll leave the uh staff recommendation up on the screen um for a few moments for your consideration. Um, I'd also just like to note that um, Matthew Davis, uh, VP of development with past developments, also has a presentation prepared for council should they wish to, uh, see it. Um, I'm available now or, uh, following Matt's presentation uh, for any questions if you have them. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. Jeez. Council may wish to invite public participation. Uh, we missed that component at the start of this. Yeah, sure. The people that haven't spoken yet, does anyone want to speak to this item?

Seeing none, thank you. Um before I move on to um to the developer, uh I was wondering if I can get a perspective from the the chair of the planning and land use committee. Don't want to put you on the spot. Councelor, councelor Ward, go ahead. Oops. Councelor Ward follow. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, planning and land use committee did see the same presentation uh that's been presented by staff here. Um, and I think um there would be value in in hearing from the applicant as well. Um, they have their perspective. I think um the the the general sentiment at the time um was that the the the project you know the project itself is is it's always been known that there will be uh buildings of density on that location. Uh the question just became uh whether or not the addition of uh the additional building um you know represented some kind of misrepresentation. I think and the commentary varied. Certainly my perspective was that

you you have to also be careful what you wish for um in that you know the applicants can perhaps do a better job of explaining this but there was within their right to to build a six-story building up to that sort of corner lot where where you see four stories. So part of this proposal um with this setback building allows for a public plaza area on the corner and some other amenities that fit with the community. Um whereas if they were put into a position to to not, you know, to be unable to build this conceivably you would then be left with that corner lot um vacant. And and I guess my comments to the committee were that, you know, um you could go from the frying pan into the fire, so to speak, in that if I'm the developer, it may not be feasible for me to build on that corner lot. I may then look to sell it. Um and I use the example of what's now 3554 Ryder Hedge Doll as an example where it was zoned for a specific thing. It was

formerly known as 360 Ltoria. um sold to a different developer who then used that zoning to build something that that the community certainly saw as less valuable and less um appropriate a fit. So there was that piece and I think the other piece that was an unknown at the committee time that I think there's additional light been shed on was the notion that um that there was misrepresentation that people bought this and were told okay you'd have ocean views and things and I can only speak for myself but going away from that you know I have lived experience in that area I I am the one counselor here that lives in Royal Bay I purchased a three-story town home on Ltoria fronting Latoria road and when I moved And um there was nothing in Ltoria South. So I had an unencumbered view of of the ocean. It was beautiful. And I had real estate agents telling me, "Yes, ocean view town home." Um and I corrected one who went on the third floor, looked out the bedroom window,

and said, you know, "Look at this. You got this great ocean view." And I said, "Well, it won't last." And she said, "Oh, well, no, there's a chance it could." There's a slim chance it it can, you know, if there's a gap between some buildings. But I said, "I've read the agreement. they're they're going to build things across the road here and the height variance in in these zonings is is sufficient that something will be blocked. So, ironically, my view was spoiled by the Eliza buildings. They came along at four stories um and blocked that ocean view for me and then that was further sealed when Beachlands put up uh buildings along uh along the chosen road. So since the planning and land use committee meeting that that gave me pause for thought and I thought well I did my homework and and you know I looked again at my sales agreement and I had acknowledged um when I signed off on buying a property from what was then Gablecraft which is now PATH um the document specifically stated to the

effect that that these views were subject to change and so I knew that my my neighbor didn't my neighbor was angry and said you know these these Eliza buildings are going to block our view this is outrageous just my real estate agent told me I'd have an ocean view and I pointed out that document that he had also signed that said that this wouldn't happen and so I reached out to the as part of my role as chair I reached out to um to path and said look can you provide me with with the documentation that would have been granted to these sellers because one of the concerns of the planning and land use committee was that there was misrepresentation here potentially that they were committed to ocean views and in reading through the document pretty lengthy but on page 42 section G there's a a paragraph called views light and privacy and then bear with me I'm just going to read it to you

it says prospective purchasers should be aware that views from the strata lots light exposure of the stratal lots and privacy with respect to the stratal lots may be subject to change there are no protected views within the development and the existence or unobstructed continuation of any particular view from light exposure of or privacy with respect to any Strata law is not assured given the ongoing development of Royal Bay. And I have it here and I'm willing to share it. It continues on for for a number of of more sentences, but it explicitly states that views are not guaranteed that that you do not have an ocean view. Um, you very may well look into another building much like I do today. So, this isn't just this isn't a moment where I say, "Okay, I'm I'm particularly proud of of saying, well, look, we found this." But I think it does identify to me that if there is any, you know, as the the planning and land

use committee talked about, if there's any misrepresentation or anything, I think, you know, I don't want to point the finger at the real estate industry, but people promising ocean views were uh were maybe a little misleading. And at the end of the day, we have a personal responsibility to to be aware of of what we're getting ourselves into. Um, you know, I I work in the mergers and acquisitions business, so I read through legal documents every day and and a single sentence can fundamentally change the ROI or value on a deal. And, you know, and that's the case here. I think the the developers have made it clear that this can happen. Um, so I I wanted to bring that forward because I think it clears up a misconception that we had that perhaps um, you know, false promises were made or anything like that. It's it's in the document. um every purchaser would have signed it. Um you know, and that that gives me pause for thought on the recommendation that came forward from the committee. Uh that doesn't mean I don't have sympathy.

Believe me, every time I look out my window and I see town homes and I see the back of Eliza, I I kind of long for the ocean view I once had, but as I say, I know that um that it wasn't guaranteed and I acknowledge that in writing. So, I'll just leave you with that. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councelor Day. On the questions on the presentation, please. Yeah, just wanted to um [clears throat] uh check in with regards to the percentage that would be dedicated to any commercial uh on the first floor because the commons uh in the master development agreement was to provide more pedestrianoriented business shops um a more active street front and uh it it has been disappointing to see the existing businesses that have come in. I know it's a difficult proposition. Uh the world seems organized against us who wanted to create um uh a town setting where you know there would be shops that people would enjoy strolling by. uh but that is what we were trying to uh

achieve through the the master development agreement since 1999 uh in Rock Bay and it's been refined and changed and refined and and I understand we're responding to a different market um in many ways uh bricks and mortar are being replaced by online shopping and that's a reality but I'd like to try to adhere to the fact that experiences are still really important and there still are businesses who rely on real live clients attending their facilities and I'm hoping that we're at least still trying to achieve that. So, I'd like to know what percentage um are actually commercial entities here and what percentage are residential and refine our plan based on what the vision for this area was.

Thank you through the mayor. Um, I'm doing my best to look up the square footage, but along the Royal Commons Road, the entire frontage on the ground floor is commercial units. I don't know the exact square footage. I'm trying to look it up, but that whole frontage is required in the zoning bylaw to be commercial units. Um, I just quickly looked up, we do have a clause in area 2. Um, bear with me, I'm going to read this. is a little lengthy, but um within area 2, assembly and entertainment uses, bakery, eating and drinking establishments, personal services, pet daycarees, and retail stores are the only permitted uses on the first floor of any building fronting the north parcel line in area 2, except that offices may be permitted on the first story of a mixeduse building fronting the northern parcel line in area 2 in accordance with a section below that, which basically speaks to professional office and medical uses provided they do not take up more than 50% of the total

ground floor. Um so what that is intending to do is to activate the street and have specific uses permitted in that building that create that active street frontage and not necessarily businesses that close at 4:00 in the afternoon and things like that. So it is written into the zone. So when those are built and it becomes time for business licenses to be issued, um the planning team would be reviewing those applications against this bylaw to ensure that they are active um businesses on that street. So I guess it would be fairly fair to say that if it's a six-story building and the first floor is commercial, it's 20%.

Um, in this case I would say it's less than 20% because it's just on that frontage on Royal Commons Road where the first floor along Ryder would be all residential units. So it'd be probably of the total area maybe 5% perhaps the applicant would have numbers that could speak to that but it would be less than 20% because it is just required along the Royal Commons frontage um where the rest would be residential. Okay. So, I guess the the point I'm making is that um uh an area that was originally designed to be our major commercial center is has already been downgraded significantly. And so it it is my hope that where uh real feedback is coming from the community saying um this isn't uh what we had envisioned based on the pictures the plans despite the the details that I know they put in there and that everyone has to sign off on. Uh, I think from a planning perspective, what the city of Cowwood promised to provide to our community was different than what we're

seeing because that looks like a big box from the architectural drawing. and it isn't particularly articulated or improved upon or there doesn't seem to be a great deal being given back to the as at least an homage to the plan that that brought this forward. So, I'm I'm hopeful uh I was hopeful that the recommendation from the planning and land use committee to try to improve this and I recognize that there is fourtory element with a bit of a setback for this sixtory behind that. Uh but uh I I feel that I I would like to uh to be able to stand uh in front of a building that's been built after 25 years of active planning and effort to build a new and vibrant community in Cwood and say that I'm proud and the developer is proud of of what has been built there today 25 years later. Thanks.

Thank you very much. Uh, councelor Jordison. Thank you, mayor. Um, I had a couple questions. I to staff, I guess. I just wanted to ask I'm just really curious. Why can you only have a fourstory building when there's commercial on the bottom in this case? Through the mayor. Um, that is a a great question. Um, that is um I mean the bylaw was written before I'm here, so I before I was part of the city, so I'm not 100% the rationale behind that. Um, but it was written that way um at the time likely to uh encourage a mix of building types would be my my guess. Um, yeah. Sorry, I I unfortunately don't have a better answer. Sorry, you might be able to speak to that.

All right, please. Yeah, thank you. So, the CD28 zone has a maximum building height for mixeduse buildings of 15 meters. So, a mixeduse building is one that would have residential and commercial. So, that's limited to four stories. And then apartments um has a maximum building height of 24 m. So, up to six stories. um that is more in line with the the sub area plan within the OCP that speaks to having um shorter heights along Royal Commons and mixeduse buildings there. So um subsequent to that the building I guess everybody is suggesting the building fronts onto Royal Commons but it technically really doesn't like I mean it does but the frontage of that building isn't on Royal Commons. So, I just think that this is a real um not very neat one and that like I guess I'm just wondering is is it better maybe to have park amenity space on the outer edge and move the building over and do the six stories would that limit would that help with a view point?

Yeah, thank you. So, um, in terms of your comment related to the front lot line that the building doesn't technically front onto Royal Commons, our land use bylaw defines corner lots. Um, we identify the front lot line as the shorter of the two. And so that is why we consider this building fronting onto Royal Commons, which is why it is required to provide commercial on the ground floor, which limits it to four stories, which is why they're proposing a variance to six stories. Um, in terms of park, there is a a portion of park to the south of that property. Um we do see this development within the overall development of Ltoria South. Um we have received significant park dedication and amenities as part of their original development agreement.

Okay. Um, I guess I just I just wanted to say that um I I think it's important to note that this application isn't being um considered in isolation and there's a future long-term care facility planned immediately to the north of this site. Um that will look as if it's almost um eight floors by the time it's built. So, I feel like they were um I feel like this argument is really not that beneficial um because there's not going to be a view for either buildings in the end. Um that building is going to be so large that you won't be able to see over there. So, um I just think it's um I think PATH deserves some recognition for the vision and long-term planning that has gone into creating this sense of um place. And um you know I'm not um I'm not disag on on their views. I I just think that uh you know it doesn't mean that council approves every application or every

variance that comes before us um from path that but we still you know we have an obligation to scrutinize each one but I just think it's fair to acknowledge that they're they're a developer that have worked really hard for many years toward creating a co cohesive community rather than simply a collection of individual projects and I just I just really appreciate that. So thank you. Thank you very much, Council War. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, I was sort of thrust into speaking a little earlier than I um planned on or envisioned on, and I think I would have preferred to have heard from the applicant as well.

So, I'm going to request through the chair that we do that momentarily. Um, I I did though um want to say a couple things. I think this notion that there's a loss of commercial area is is not accurate. I think the only real loss to commercial area that occurred in the Royal Bay or to core was at that former 360 Ltoria or 3 3554 Rider where the sale to a new buyer meant that the intentions for the site changed drastically. And so then they completed or met the absolute minimum standard in a five-story building to put in um about 750 square ft of of commercial space. And I don't want to be this harbinger of of doom here, but my thought process in this is that, you know, path or gablecraft for as they're formerly known have been the architects of this site from the outset. And the proposal they've come up with when we look at, if you want to call it a benefit for the entirety of of Royal Bay

and Ltoria South is the sort of um the the frontage area on the commons building, that sort of town square element which you see probably on greater scale on the corner of Ryder and Ltoria. Um that matters I think because if they were to go ahead and simply say okay we we put them in a position of we cannot build the stepped building with the fourstory piece um then as I said they can build a third sixstory building still it's still going to have the same impact by my count there's roughly about a half dozen units that may or may not see a slight improvement on view that ultimately as councelor Jordison stated will be negated by an over eight story plus mechanic mechanical rooms and things. Um, uh, senior's home when that is constructed, not to mention high-rise development and things on the beachland side. So, my concern really is, and I'll be I'll be very candid, in a perfect world, I would like to see nothing more than four stories in Victoria South. Um, I I like

what PATH does, but at the end of the day, I don't like six stories. I don't like the massing. Um, you know, I understand the economic condition for it. I I would much prefer to see nothing higher than that, but I'm a realist and I I'm looking at the facts and the data and trying to keep emotion out of it. I lost my view and it sucked, you know, to a fourtory, so it's relevant. Three story, four story took it away. In this case, a six story takes away a fourtory, but they have the right to build there. And I guess my concern for the community and for the residents in Eliza is is if this isn't the option, beware of what the option becomes. And that's not to say that there's anything malicious there. It's just that if I'm path and I know the economic case and I say I have the ability to build the five, sixtory buildings economically in today's market, that makes sense and I wouldn't begrudge them on that. Now we have that

parcel on the corner where we still have that ground floor commercial space. Somebody else will come along and look to build there. Now, you might have a little laneway behind it between the two CD zones um as you originally saw with the real estate um office on that site, but there's no guarantee you get that corner kind of amenity, that that additional space. There's no guarantee that the form kind of blends in with what's there. Um who knows what the future holds, I guess. And and in this case, as much as I overall personally don't like it, I recognize that PATH has come to the table to say we're going to do the best we can by the commons area.

Um, and what's economically viable for us. So, you don't have to love something, I think, to know that it's probably best for everyone. Um, and that's where I I wanted to kind of leave my thought process, but I think some of these questions that have been raised in fairness, we should hear from the applicant to better understand uh the mindset behind it. Thank you. Um, I'm I'm going to before I'll let the applicant set up right now. I'm going to take a 4m minute health break here, but go ahead and set up and we'll be ready for him. Thank you.

kick us out of a recess and um I'll turn it over to the applicant for his presentation. Over to you, Matt. Thank you. Uh good evening, Mayor and Council. Thank you for the opportunity. Um I mean, between planning and some of the discussion that's already happened, I think a lot of this has been covered. So I will skip through my presentation rather quickly and but it is still I think a good opportunity for yourselves to uh ask questions of myself uh and path and our intentions for the site um once I'm done. So yeah, my name is Matthew Davis, VP development with PATH. I've been with the group about 12 years.

And since we started um building here at Royal Bay, um we've delivered now about a thousand homes, over 100,000 square feet of commercial space, parks, trails, public gathering spaces, uh and the infrastructure required to support World Bay's growth. So to summarize uh again what we're asking for today, we're seeking a development variance permit uh to increase the allowable height of building E um a new mixeduse building within area 2 of the CD28 zone from 15 meters to 24 meters. Uh as it's been communicated through staff, we really see this as a technical classification issue rather than a building form issue because the building includes commercial on the ground floor. um it's permitted to be 15 meters in height rather than 24. And uh to a question that was answered earlier, I've actually typically seen the opposite where the mixed use heights are generally higher in other municipalities. So that is something that's um I do think unique in this case uh just to answer that earlier

question. So to step uh by stepping the building like we have in our proposal from four to six stories uh we're able to blend these two height limits in a way that keeps the commercial frontage within the lower mixeduse scale while allowing the residential portion uh behind it to align uh with the apartment height already contemplated for this area. uh building E, the new building submitted uh as a separate application from the previous five uh on parcel B that have already been approved and are all sorry four of those five are six stories in height. Uh we've worked closely with uh city of Cwood's planning department to arrive at this building form which we feel meets the intent of the official community plan. Um the commercial frontage uh along with Royal Commons has deliberately stepped back to create a public plaza that isn't required. I think the uh minimum step backs 4 and a half meters. We've stepped the building back. So the first floor of the building back to about 7 mters to create this plaza.

The site uh just as a reminder located at the northwest corner um Ryder and Royal Commons opposite the Royal Bay commercial hub. um just north of the Bella Park uh new condominium development that's under construction. The official community plan identifies this area as a pedestrianoriented mixed use and building E has been designed to complete that vision. Think I'll skip through some of these. So this just gives you a sense of what's under construction so far. So, uh, north end of the site, left hand side of the page, uh, mixeduse rental building that's now open, occupied. Uh, and then you can see the amenity building in the middle of the site. And then to the top of the page, our next uh, 93 unit rental building, which will deliver uh, in the first quarter of next year.

So the uh original site plan for the uh DP application submitted in 2023 um shows the existing four buildings as part of that DP as well as the mixeduse building as well as the uh display display where the previous Eliza display center was um and this building will be and I I'll have an overlay coming up here that will uh display a little more clearly. So the so essentially what's happened here the net add additional units is uh I think it's 65 units and that is because we have shortened apartment D and added apartment E. So the additional density added to the site is not just apartment E. We've taken units out of D uh and transferred them to E. Uh and it's important to note for the site we're well below the permitted density.

uh we're permitted 2.5 FSR and I think we're building all of parcel B to 1.65 um so significantly below the maximum. So just uh to give you a sense of the new vers site plan uh like I said shortened up building D and we've added um this stepped four to six story building for building E with the retail fronting uh fronting Royal Comments and the retail to answer the earlier questions about 2600 square feet in that building. To give you some context on how much retail that is, the mixeduse building to the east of it that just finished has about 15,000 uh square feet of retail.

So just the um original proposal proposal versus the current, we brought that forward in 2025 uh with staff and it located um the building at the minimum setback at Royal Commons um with a full height commercial fronting rider. Uh but through consultation with city staff, we agreed to reduce the height of the commercial portion and building back to that 7 m I mentioned earlier. uh well below well beyond the 4.5 meter setback only would allow to create the public plaza. Um we also stepped that sixtory story portion back uh to achie to achieve that clean four to six story transition. So just a massing model uh to show the new building as well as uh we did update this the massing is not up to date but the labeling is. So, you can see that long-term care facility that is being built. Uh, it's actually 85 ft of residential construction, but our understanding with rooftop units and um all the mechanical as mentioned earlier going to the building, it will be over 100 ft tall.

It's also important to note, I just want to point out that the six-story buildings we're building on site are actually permitted to go to 24 meters and all of them as of now are below 22 mters, the 21 and change. Um, so not even building to that max height that we're permitted within those sixtory buildings. And just uh another look at that plaza uh at the corner of Ryder and Royal Commons. Really what we're trying to do there is continue. We think that um Royal Commons now, if you've been down there, has really kind of been activated as sort of a high street based on the treatment of um the plazas, the sidewalks, the um common area. Uh and really the intent behind this proposal is to add to that uh just a section uh down Ryder Hedge Stallway with the uh new building in the forefront there in the middle.

Uh so the completed mixeduse building on the lefth hand side along Royal Commons. The shops you'll notice are opening now uh constantly. I'm happy to uh let you know we're working on a restaurant pub as we speak. Hopefully going to get that open shortly. Um and uh building E there on the right hand side with the active frontage along row common decorative um hardscaping, planting beds, benches, uh public seating to try to create that um and encourage that public interaction with the space. So just another uh I mentioned this earlier just on the permitted height. So the idea that the fourstory portion of the building uh is under that 15 meter height uh limit with the six uh story portion being significantly below the 24 meter um height limit.

Another look at the uh measurements on the height. I think Matt shared this earlier. Do that. Yeah. So just uh to conclude um you know the proposed variance aligns directly we feel align directly with the goals of the OCP and the CD28 zone. As this OCP states the northern boundary of area 2 contemplates the framing for commons roadal commons providing the pedestrianoriented street enclosure with an appropriate mix of land uses ground floor retail with commercial andor residential above. Um so again just to reiterate you know the variance we see is a technical classification issue and uh because that building includes commercial frontage um being classified as mixeduse and therefore subject to that 50 meter height uh variance. Um at this point happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thanks very much uh Matt. Uh what's the square footage in the bottom of that uh of the for the commercial side right now in square feet I of the of this new building about 2600 2600 so the entire building that port that fourstory portion of it is how how many square foot would you say? Well so no the retail will be under that in in terms of all the floors. Yeah. So it's it must uh call it 10,000 square feet the fourtory portion. Interesting. And and I I know it's, you know, this has probably never been asked enough, but could it be entirely commercial? Is is is that something you guys would do?

Again, like, you know, and I hear to counselor D's questions earlier, the commercial market, it's we've had lots of, you know, our our goals for the commons, our goals for these other sites within Ro has been to get the right mix of tenants and uses. Yeah. We haven't seen the demand. [snorts] That's the truth. I'm I'm asking. Yeah, I have an idea. Yeah. Um, we'd be open to that. I I guess what I would say to that Miracle Bay is we are hesitant to build product like that on spec. If we had a use, we would consider it. Okay. Yeah. I I do. Um, so can I ask you another question? It's all related right now in in the uh in in Ro comments, you know, the the shopping. Do you own all is that all your buildings and and you lease them out, right? is correct. That so you have a different business unit that looks after all that stuff.

Yeah, we don't do we own the assets. We don't property manage them in house. We use a third party property management company, but there are Okay, thanks very much. And I'll open it up for people. Uh, council growth, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. But I think you asked answered most of my questions. You said something about 15,000 square feet. What was that in reference to? Did I mishar you? I was just to give context to how much rental uh retail was in this building. I said there's 2,600 and the building adjacent to it, the mixed use building has about 15,000. Okay. So, that's the 15 from uh for the entire strip of that road. Okay.

Um I think they that's all covered then from uh Mayor Kobayashi's questions. Thank you. Thanks so much, Council Ward. Thank you. And just just feeding into what the mayor was asking you, Matt. Um I know Path Gablecraft has a bit of history in Calgary as well. I wonder if are you familiar with the university district there? The new development there? I am. I've actually toured I haven't toured it. I toured it maybe two years ago. Okay. It's probably changed a lot since, but yes. Yeah, I was I was just there. And I think what what interested me is that the residential component looks very similar to what we're we have here, right? It's it's four to six story. Um but what they've created in a in a relatively new area um a community much like Royal Bay is is a vibrant kind of community where you've got mixed use where you've got residential and on the upper you know five floors um and commercial. I guess when I think of the the long-term vision and I completely understand what you're saying right now

about demand and you know on the commercial side and and that it's a bit of a sluggish go um but I'm trying to think further out than maybe past councils in in call would have and I I envision a vibrant Royal Bay decades from now and I look at this street yes the what we've done in the commons is is great I I think that vision there as you said it's starting to emerge as a bit of a high street I think once um the last few tenants are in the existing building and others it it will really round it out. But longer term, I see a vision for that to wrap around. Like I look at this building that you proposed here, building E, and I see the commercial element on the ground floor. And I I can envision a scenario whereby the future state, if there were more commercial elements along that entirety, they're building E, building D, it then starts to dovetail into the retail commercial element um that other developers are building down further. I'm trying to place the name, but I think you know

what I the more ground oriented ones there. Um, and so there's some connectivity because right now I sort of see this patchwork approach where we we've got this sort of outdoor shopping plaza down opposite the museum, very pedestrianoriented kind of area and then we would have strictly residential for like a very quiet just just walkable street that comes up when in fact you know when I I look at that university district I would encourage anyone to kind of Google it, take a look at it. Um you've got various cafes and and uh restaurants and and other services and things that fill in that space. Um the type of thing that you know some of them on on like this corner for example would be open later and a bit more vibrant.

Some of them being professional services and things that would close at a you know a regular business hour so that the residents aren't disturbed. But I just wonder in terms of timeline I'm really going on here. I apologize to everybody but in terms of timeline and where this development is is is it feasible to leave that option open um you know over the next little while just to see you know can we work together and and see um talk about economic development can we do something here like that and and be flexible on you know on trying to find partners and other things to explore something like that. Yeah, I think so. I think as you know, the mayor probably would acknowledge, we like we've have a great working relationship with the city of Collwood and yourselves and we're open always open to talk about those opportunities. Um, specifically with this site, I think one of the challenges is we have residents now living in the building adjacent. So, one of the things we're trying to accomplish is get this building going soon so that we can sort

of complete that portion of the community. One of the things we're a bit concerned about is just general safety in that area because you got a building that's going to be complete in uh March on the other side. You've got this building and you've got the amenity building right behind. So, we're trying to create that hub. To answer your question though, you know, specifically, we're open to looking at those opportunities as time goes. Um, but we have been pretty amazed at how challenging the commercial piece has been. If you look at like the our our our premier corner of the project arguably is the corner of Ryder and Ltoria and we couldn't find someone for that space. We were picky. We didn't want um the same of as what we already had. We wanted a restaurant and ultimately you see we ended up putting our Bella Park presentation center in it because we couldn't fill it. Um so we're certainly open opportunities. We just, you know, we've got uh we've engaged with callers, haven't engaged with them for the last few years, and they've been out looking for tenants, and it's just been quiet.

Sure. And that's a fair answer. I mean, the market is what it is. I I'll leave it there. Thank you. Uh, councelor Jensen, thank you, your worship. Um, I mean, it's tough to process some of these ideas uh without seeing it before us. Uh but I appreciate the discussion. Uh you know, I look at this and it's often times we hear, you know, it doesn't fit with the neighborhood, but what I see there certainly looks similar to the building immediately across the street or side by each and I I do accept that uh this is a technical issue more so than really someone coming in to try and jam in a few more suites uh you know with an additional floor. Um, and you know, I I I hear the residents. I really do. And I can't count the number of times that this council sat here at this table trying to explain uh you know, that people have been let down by the real estate industry. Uh, and I think

there's a lesson in there uh for uh certainly for developers who are uh partnering with different firms and putting together their sales packages and their portfolio. So I do accept that uh and I I can envision uh realators saying what they need to say to uh get a signature on on a document. But the other part is is I mean nothing I see here is out of line. Uh there are there was discussion along the way and I' I've been here since I guess really since the early days of when this was start starting to be built and uh there's lots of discussion about multi multi-stories like uh you know 20 stories and stuff which has come and gone over the few years. So I mean again what I see here is not out of line. I'm certainly not opposed to what what I see. And in fact, I quite like the plaza area and the uh availability of some some store footage.

Thank you, worship. Thank you very much. Um I'm just looking at this right now. The recommendation is send it back to staff, but I don't think you can add anything more. Can you staff? Um at this stage I I feel like one of the things that was missed in the planning and land use uh committee meeting was just discussing that uh we have worked with the applicant pretty significantly. The initial application that we received was six stories as Matt showed in his presentation. It was kind of six stories almost right up to the edge of the property line and we've worked with them to step it back significantly as as he showed. So I feel like we've we could always maybe have further discussions, but I think we've we've made significant progress from what we initially uh received as an initial application.

Yeah, I'm I'm just looking for a staff recommendation because uh I the my presentation has my the staff recommendation from the planning and land use committee that I hopefully the staff recommendation was to approve. Um I think that is the Yeah, that is the one. Okay, that's the one. Okay. Um, councelor Jensen, you still hot there? Oh, okay. Yeah, you're just moving. Thank you. Uh, can I get a second here, please? Okay, councelor Gro. Uh, discussion. Further discussion. Seeing none, I'll call the question. All those in favor? Uh, any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries unanimous. Thanks very much. Okay, we'll move on to 8.2. Mr. Johnson, introduce the speakers, please. Thank you. Uh through the mayor, to members of council, this is development variance permit application DBP 0023 446 Pelican Drive. The recommendation is that development variance permit number DVP 0023 for the lands at 446 Pelican Drive be approved which would have the effect of superseding the condition imposed by DVP0907 requiring that the highest floor be no higher than the highest street level fronting the property thereby permitting the use of the existing upper floor area above the garage as part of the

principal residence and that all remaining provisions and conditions under DBP 0907 remain full and effective. and in force. There is a staff presentation should you wish to receive it and Caitlyn Suzuki our planner one uh can provide that should council wish to receive that. Okay. Thank you. Your report was very good. It's very straightforward. I'm just going to open it up to questions here from from council and I will open with councelor Jordis. Thank you mayor. Um I just had a question. Um was concerned about the sequence here. Um the report says a building permit was issued in July to finish the upper floor area and then following a review of the property's approval history, staff determined that a variance was required. So I'm just can staff explain how we issued the building permit before identifying the restriction in the existing DVP.

Uh thank you for the question uh through the chair. So when the um building permit was initially reviewed um it was reviewed um largely against our land use bylaw. Um since the works proposed were all interior uh there were no um it aligned fully with our bylaw regulations. Um so it wasn't until um afterwards um that we realized that there was this uh old development variance permit. Um at the time staff didn't go looking for development variance permits since no variances were required. Okay. Um and just um just from that I just wanted to ask um because the condition originally formed part of the rationale for allowing increased building height on the Pelican Drive properties. Do you know how many other properties remain subject to it? And should council expect similar applications in the future?

Uh thank you for the question. Um I would have to um just pull it up. Um but if you think there were uh multiple properties within the sub uh subdivision that were um subject to this variance. Um, I believe the um I believe it's seven lots that uh were permitted to increase building height from the 8.5 to the 10.5 m. Um, and I believe um one of which already uh previously applied for a variance um to uh increase the height without this condition. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Counc. Thank you, worship. Um, you know, quite frankly, we don't see these, uh, come forward that often that are homeowner driven and and not developer, uh, driven. And quite frankly, uh, you know, uh, I had the pleasure of having a recck room for my kids. So, God bless. And I would love to move this recommendation and move on to worship. Thank you. I'll flip around. I'll let uh, people ask questions. Councelor Olson.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, thank you, Caitlyn. My question really was just um staff indicate that there was uh a notification that was provided within 100 meters. Um and I was just wondering if there have been any concerns or objections uh received since the report was repaired or um sorry was prepared. I understand there was some windows removed that were potentially facing neighborhood property. So I was just wondering if that was complaint driven or if there have been any concerns raised from neighbors. Uh thank you and uh through the chair um there was um concerns from the neighboring property um at one point um we have uh I believe today after um we did receive uh a letter from the neighbor that was um included materials for the agenda today um speaking to how they were um no longer concerned. Um, other than that, we've had um I know of and someone asking questions about it at the front counter, but no other um concerns have come in.

So, one complaint and it was resolved. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, council gay. Thank you. um just always being the uh council historian. Uh there were a number of issues in the area resulting from uh new builds that took place after there there were um trying to think of the name of that when they when they have building conditions on a subdivision uh which are registered on title but they weren't didn't flow from the city, they flowed from the original development. Uh and then subsequently there was a number of concerns around height and loss of views because it is a lovely view area. Uh so I believe that's where they come from. So, I just think it's really important that we find a way to uh document our history in those regards so that the uh if if we're not remembering it, we're also not protecting the people who are expecting to be protected. So, just trying to keep our keep our history straight. Thanks.

Thank you very much. Uh Council Jensen, you want to make the motion second, please? Okay. Council Grove. Uh discussion seeing none I'll call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries unanimous and we'll move on to 8.3 de uh DVP uh 000018 221 Kofinch Road. U Mr. Johnson, please. Thank you. Your worship through the members of council. This is development variance permit number DVP 0018. The recommendation is for these lands that this variance be approved which would have the effect of varying varying section 6.14.3 of subdivision and development servicing bylaw number 202024 to permit an increase to the maximal allowable driveway with a corner lot from 7 m to 22.8 8 meters to provide access to the two proposed duplexes on the subject property and that staff work with the applicant to incorporate permeable paving materials with the driveway areas through the development variance process. There is a staff presentation should you receive it and Matt Blakeley our senior planner has that information or ultimately we can answer questions that council may have.

Okay. Thank you. Matt, could you proceed with the presentation? Thank you.

All right. Thank you again mayor and council. Uh so the purpose of this presentation is to provide a highle summary of development variance permit application number uh DVP 000018 for the property located at 221 Goldfinch Road. Uh a more detailed analysis and supporting information are provided in the staff report. As always, uh the subject property located in the Lagoon Beach neighborhood is near Lagoon Road, is currently zoned R1 residential, and is within the OCP land use designation, neighborhood, hillside, and shoreline. The property features a continuous corner frontage along Goldfinch Road and has an area of roughly 31 acres or 1,278 square meters. The property currently contains an existing single family residential dwelling. In terms of surrounding context, the broader neighborhood is also primary R1 residential development is mainly single family homes, both freehold and strata with some two family dwellings nearby.

Uh so this proposal, you'll uh recognize it uh it's related to uh two applications. um a reszoning application uh to establish the proposed CD45 zone, which uh is also on tonight's council agenda, as well as a form and character development permit for the proposed development of two duplex buildings with each unit, including a secondary suite. The variance before council this evening is required because the combined driveway widths proposed along the corner lot fronted exceed the bylaw maximum. staff are bringing the driveway variance forward this evening alongside the zoning amendment because the variance relates to the city's subdivision and development servicing bylaw uh not the proposed land use uh or zoning regulations. Considering these items together helps resolve key bylaw matters at the same time and provides greater clarity and certainty for the project.

Uh so the the specific request um as I said is to vary section 6.14.3 of the subdivision and development services and bylaw. The bylaw permits a maximum driveway width of 7 m on a corner lot. The applicant is requesting 22.8 m in total with 11.96 m for duplex block one and 10.84 meters for block two. The key question is whether the additional width is justified by the site constraints and the resulting access design. So I'll just pause here. Um so uh as you can see uh it we measure the width uh for the driveways in this instance at property line. Uh so the driveways do taper as they get towards the rightway but as I said we me measure at the property line which is why the distances are so large.

So the original proposal um in 2025 included four separate driveways. Through staff review, the design was revised to provide the two shared driveways, as I was just showing you, with each driveway serving one duplex building and its secondary suites. This approach reduces the number of driveway crossings and better aligns with the city development permit design guidelines, which encourage shared service areas and consolidated driveways across sidewalks. However, the city's subdivision uh and development servicing bylaw limits the combined driveway width on corner lots to 7 meters as I mentioned. Um and the applicant is proposing 22.8 necessitating this variance request. So the increased width is largely driven by the the site's physical constraints. Uh the the lot is shallow, irregular in shape and subject to setback requirements that limit building placement. As a result, there is limited room for driveways to taper while still providing required parking and safe functional access.

Uh staff also note that the previous four driveway concept would likely have resulted in similar overall driveway width when combined and would have required an additional variance for the number of driveways. Uh the revised two driveway design therefore better aligns with the bylaw even through uh even though uh width variance is still required. Uh the revised design does increase hard surfacing in the front yard and therefore is not fully aligned with the OCP guidelines that seek to reduce the visual and environmental impacts of large driveway areas. To help address this, council may wish to consider a condition requiring the applicant to work with staff to incorporate permeable pavers, grass, or a similar treatment for the driveways.

So, in summary, staff support the requested variance because the proposed driveway width is driven by the site's physical constraints, including the shallow lot depth, corner lot configuration, and setback requirements that limit building placement. The revised design consolidates access into two shared driveways rather than four, which reduce the driveway crossings and better aligns with the city's development permit guidelines. And while staff recognize the variance request is significant, staff are of the opinion that the oversized driveways are necessary to provide safe functional access to the proposed duplexes and their secondary suites. Uh just to note uh this was brought up as part of the zoning amendment application, but there is a 2meter municipal road dedication that's required along the frontage of this development. Um this is to achieve an overall 18 m rightway width along the subject property's frontage. Uh this dedication would be required um or this dedication has been approved and uh is now done um in advance of council considering the amending bylaw for adoption tonight.

Um so just quickly the uh development has also been reviewed against the proposed CD45 zone and complies with all the listed zoning regulations. uh development sign has been placed on the property and postcards outlining the variance requests were mailed to neighbors within 100 meters of the property prior to this evening's meeting. Um and then finally, um these are some options to consider uh for council. Um, and I will just leave the staff recommendation on the screen for your consideration. Um, if necessary, the applicant is here to uh answer any questions you may have and uh both Mr. Rosenberg and myself are available should you have any questions for staff. Thank you. Thank you very much. Great presentation. Councelor Day, questions.

Thank you. Uh, I'd like to confirm that there is sufficient parking within the driveways for uh both the suite and the home to park their vehicles without parking across a pedestrian pathway uh through the chair. Thank you for the question. Uh yes, uh there's uh significant uh space. There's um drive or sorry there's a garage which would accommodate a vehicle and then um two spaces um one in tandem and then one beside for the the secondary suite. Um, so me probably the most conflict would be on the uh the right side of the screen if there was guests over or things like that. But it would generally I don't see any conflict um in terms of uh what is required as per our parking bylaw.

But uh for there to them to park uh outside of their garage, they would be able to fit without interfering with the pedestrians uh realm there. Yes. Um the gray blocks on the the image there represent the space that a vehicle would take up. Um so it there's still several meters before where the sidewalk would be. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you, uh councelor George. Thank you, mayor. I just had a quick question. Uh it says here like the second part of the motion even um about the I just want clarification about the proposed mitigation of the permeable paving. Um it's important enough to address the amount of hard surface being approved.

So I just want to understand why um staff is simply direct well why is being directed to simply um for staff to work with the applicant rather than making that an explicit condition. Sarah uh thank you for the question through uh through the mayor. Um that is uh was put in as a condition um just uh because the uh development permit is approved by staff. So through if this variance was granted then we would have the the set driveway area and that staff can work with the the applicant to determine an appropriate level of uh permeability for the driveway. Um and we would work with them through that uh before approving the development permit.

Okay. So that's why it's worded that way. council can suggest a a stronger condition, but that is that is why it's worded that way is because we need before we would issue the development permit, we would work with you. Okay. Thank you, Counc. Thank you, Mayor. I'm just asking about is that red strip the sidewalk? That red strip represents the 2 m dedication um the actual road crosssection. And um I don't know if John can speak to that if it's already um figured out yet, but the road cross section would have the sidewalk basically in that red area because it is at the property line.

Yeah. So I noticed that out to the uh the party on Saturday night in the park. Uh there were a lot of cars parked along the strip of road. So it's very narrow and there's a wet ditch on either side. It's a little bit tricky. So, I'm just wondering about the potential for improving that road as the park increases in its use and the issue of the because there's a corner right there too. So, I'm not really doubting the improvement or this particular application. It's more of how it applies to its relationship to the road and the road itself. They'd be required to do the frontage works to the center line of the rideway. So you'll see formalized curb on the house side of it, but you won't see a formalized curb on the opposite side, which should improve the walking experience, which I suffered there.

Significant cars are leading. Everybody is very respectful. It was not a problem, but it's a bit tight. Yeah, they'd be off the roadway under the new bill. Pet, thanks. Okay, council Ward. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I recall this from the planning and land use committee and I was just looking at the original diagrams with the four driveways and it's not very often you can consolidate point of entry to roads that actually would improve the efficiency of the road. Um it's kind of a unique opportunity and when you compare the two to me it's just a no-brainer uh particularly how it tapers once you hit the um 2 meter dedication. So I'd like to move the staff recommendation.

Okay, great. Timing's perfect. Second, please councelor Jordan. Uh discussion seeing any uh call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none motion carries unanimous. Thank you very much. We move on. We are now at 8.4 website action plan. Mr. Johnson, you want to speak to this? come on up for us. There we go. Mr. Mayor, council, um I didn't think I'd be back here quite this early in my I should apologize probably. Um I'm speaking to the um the website again. Uh we've got the current stat the action plan status report. Um, we've got four specific concerns. The directory, um, council directed the restoration of the staff directory. The report describes the existing contact model, which predates the motion and marks the item as complete. With respect, it is not complete. The BC government's decision to remove its own directory four days ago has been immediately criticized by BC's own information and privacy commissioner who called it a regrettable and very serious transparency issue and encouraged public bodies not to follow suit.

Sanage Oak Bayol Sydney and the CRD itself all still publish uh staff directors. We ask council to confirm its direction and require a specific implementation plan. The bylaws repository the bylaws improvement are welcome. However, the regository lacks a search function. Council's direction specifically required a searchable repository. The council motion tracker. We cannot find the March 9th. This is an example. We cannot find the March 9th motion directing staff to collaborate with Lang Langford on solid waste collection. A unanimous decision with potential savings of over $280 per household. If that motion is absent, the tractor is not yet comprehensive. We ask staff to confirm its completeness.

The policies underpinning the website date from 2009 20 and 2014. Let's wrap up. They are foundational documents and they are seriously outdated. We ask council to direct that they be reviewed and updated as a priority. Uh we genu genu genuinely acknowledge the progress made the bylaw improvements the motion tracker the development tracker work but the staff directory has been outstanding since December 8th 2025 and really it's staff directory that started this whole thing off in the first place. Now more than eight months with the election seven weeks away, we respectfully ask council to act on its commitment today. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay, Mr. Johnson.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council. This is the website action report. This the motion is to receive the report and uh staff are here to answer any questions. There aren't a presentation to go with this. We're um with still within the timeline of the 90 days that council gave us the direction to have these improvements. This is considered the interimm report at this point providing the direction that you've given and where we're at to date and staff are here to answer questions you may have regarding this report. Mr. Thank you. Open it up for questions from council. Councelor Day, please. Thank you. Um, yeah, I it's funny that uh I I didn't speak to uh the Royal Bay Homeowners Association, but we came to the same conclusions. Uh, and I'm concerned that uh when I I won't look too hard for it, but when I was reading the report, and I'm very impressed that it's here already. that's great. Uh but it says that uh they're substantially complete and I don't feel that that is

the case because um what I heard from not just the Royal Bay Homeowners Association but others who contacted council was that they wanted to have the ability to contact specific staff members where they've been dealing with an issue already. uh that the uh they don't have to tell the story all over again and we haven't provided that yet. Uh so I wanted to say that um the staff directory part for me um it it doesn't accomplish I mean I can think of lots of out of the box ways that we could do something around the malberry bush that that could prevent us from having spam zilla problems. Uh but at the same time I think the basic principle is there that we still need a staff directory so that if you're dealing with somebody here at the city on an issue that you can recont them if that issue comes up again. Uh so I think that that is an issue. Uh I think the governance

ownership that's great that we have a place where it belongs but the part that is missing is the departments verifying the data and that has not been happening and has not been happening since about 2022 uh because I I just constantly run things where it hasn't gotten updated. So we need I'm not saying this to be hard on anyone. We just we need a better process. And our report tonight also included captures or kind of screenshots of what has been done on the website. And those reflect the kind of poor digital quality that I often find on the website that I find frustrating because I'm getting old and wearing these and they get smudgy and the if it's blurry, I can't hardly read it. So, uh I'm sure I'm not alone in finding that frustrating. Uh and then we have quite a few data points that I've identified as being needing to be updated that have been only partially updated. Development stats for one. Uh we only have three

quarters of 2025 on there still. Um, so I'm not satisfied that we're taking the feedback that the public is giving us uh as seriously as we need to and I think that we need to find a better way to get that website updated. So because that's free that's free to get our residents reviewing it for us and telling us, hey, you missed a spot over here and and we could really make use of their help. Thanks. Thank you very much. Yeah, one of my frustrations right now, I'll give you direct feedback, is you know that developer tracking. You know, if if you don't want to keep it up to date, then why the hell would we have it in there?

Pardon my language, but that's frustrating. It really is frustrating. You know, h have up-to-date information. My my goodness, it it just doesn't make sense. Please, Mari, you're Thank you. Um so the development tracker which is a new tool that we have on our website is linked to Tempest and so when we have new applications they are automatically updated onto our website. Um we have limitations in the statuses that we can provide. So for development permits we typically just provide the submission date and the issuance date. Okay. Um for reasonzoning applications we are able to include when it would go to planning and land use and when it would go forward for readings at council. Um we so is there a better way to indicate that in and not without creating a lot more work for yourself right now but it's frustrating because you know and then you know I get more more current information and then the public is looking at information that's old like I can get I can go to you for example and

get more current information but I know using that development tracker it wasn't current like I can show you examples of this has happened you was just querying some things right now. So that is a bit frustrating. So they should have the public should have the same access as we have and and I'm lucky because I can go walk down to your office and and ask. So that's what the issue is more and and if it isn't quite up to date just to have maybe just some way we can signal that it isn't up to date so that people know that that's not the most current thing they should be using. I don't know how to do this and I'm just suggesting this to you. It it is a frustration though that so I didn't mean to interrupt you but uh that you know I I understand this now you've contextualized it for me so so thank you very much but there's got to be a way if it isn't quite up to date then then we it's got to have an ability

to say that there so I would say for reasonzoning applications I would say those types of applications are generally more up to-date. It's development permits that we do not put the plans up on the website when they submit them because we have an internal review process where we may receive three different iterations of plans. And so we were not going to put up those different iterations on the website because that could cause confusion. So we have only been putting up development permits once they are issued. Um I would say um the development permit delegation bylaw of course is going this evening to council for first second and third reading. So development permits um will be more up to date on the development tracker once they do go to council because they'll be on the agenda and we will be able to put that up on the development tracker. Okay.

Uh great explanation. uh it just requires that explanation when people are at it that if it's not there the reason why hasn't been um hasn't been approved something like that just an indication yeah perhaps we can consider putting up some wording about what to expect for each type of application thank you uh councel please thank you I I find it difficult when we ask for action and we get excuses and I'm I'm sorry but telling us that it's in tempest and you know so that's that's that is needs to be addressed. I mean you can't just tell me we can't do it like that that is not acceptable.

We are trying to be transparent with our public and whether you make a PDF and upload it through corporate services or do something. If we're going to tell people what we're doing, we need to tell people what we're doing and not make excuses. Well, we'll tell you about resonings, but we won't tell you about development permits. So, I think we need to know and and there needs to be some some clarity uh for the public to see what's coming. Okay. Um this was just uh for receipt. Um sorry, Council Jordis, please. Sorry, Mayor. Just a um a last minute question. I I guess um with seeing the concern around uh 0.1 seeing that it is uh completed but it I I I'm hearing that council doesn't feel that it is. Um I'm just wondering could staff explain whether they're asking council to reconsider that portion of its direction rather than considering it completed.

I don't think we're looking for reconsideration. I think um staff continue to explore and monitor how other communities and the province are approaching this and we'll um work to implement a solution that serves. Okay. Thank you. And and just for council's clarification, we'll bring a this is the interimm report saying these are the steps we've made to date. We've heard council's feedback. We've heard feedback uh from the community. We will take that on board and adjust course as necessary. One of the things we're trying to balance is cyber security risk insurance that we have through cyber security which requires we have certain components that are in and certain components that are out. We understand council's feedback. Uh we will make sure that we rectify that in the next update to council. Thank you. Okay, that was just for information. So, we'll move on to 8.5 uh 2027 budget approach. Unfortunately, Kathy Mlullan uh wasn't able to join us this evening.

Um and uh I can't expect you to answer all the questions, Mr. Johnson, but I we do have a few comments. So, if you want to proceed, please. And uh on this side, nothing further. Yeah, you've got a report. Oh, go ahead, please. You weren't here in the beginning of public participation, so I didn't know if you wanted to speak, so I There we go. Um, we like the direction of this uh proposed approach. Um, we're a little concerned that it's not uh detailed enough for you to actually give the endorsement um that staff are asking for. We think the endorsement should be the direction is great. Now you've got to now you've got to put some meat on the bones of this thing and let us know what does a light touch mean? what what kind of information do we need before we can just take that light touch so that people understand what you're trying to uh what you're trying to accomplish. We support the direction. We encourage

council to endorse it, but we also encourage council to recognize that the framework still needs some work before the detailed 2027 budget process begins. Uh the other issue of course is how much direction are you going to provide in terms of the 2027 budget process as a council when you've got new a new council coming into play in November and how much are you going to constrain that road of pokes and hopefully you'll all be back. Um, but in the in the um in the event that you're not, I think you've got an obligation to the new council to make sure that they have the kind of flexibility they need in order to provide a good 2027 budget process. Thank you. Thanks very much.

Okay. Uh, I'll just open the floor for questions. Uh, Council Jison, please. Thank you, Mayor. Um, CAO, I have a question about um uh and I'm not sure you'll be able to answer it, but like what could trigger an out of uh cycle service review and um can you confirm that council would still receive annual service plans and the organizationwide staffing picture for every department? I can confirm both of those. Um the intention is to show the overall FTE count and any proposed changes to that. Any changes to the FTEES will require a business case that will come in front of council. Um that is what Miss McClennon had suggested was the exceptions. So those exceptions are anything over and above with the existing FTE count that will be in each department so that council can see that and determine if the appropriate service level is met.

We've taken council's feedback about the service review process being perhaps uh somewhat arduous from what I've heard from council in the past and what we want to do is provide this in a meaningful way. What Miss McClennon did was provide an overall view which is what council had asked for in the motion. What will the budget process look like? That of course will be shaped entirely by council. It is council's budget. So we want to make sure that we're meeting what your expectations are. One of the things that we didn't benefit from this year was the implementation of our new software, Questica, and that's going to have a web-based component and it will be live so people can track expenses as they're put into the various budgets. And you will see that um I've been part of an organization that switched over to the Questica and it is quite a tool in terms of on the fly showing where changes are, what they've looked like. The rollout was intended to be for this year, but from a staffing component, we just couldn't get that across the line. that will be in conjunction with the budget

process and we'll have that outline for council's feedback, new council to make sure that they're meeting we're meeting the expectation of what council would like to see in the budget process. So, think of this as here's the global overview of what it looks like and we'll get into much more of the details when the framework uh comes forward to council with those budget um proposals. Okay. Um, sorry, I just had one other um once every four years kind of concerns me a bit. Um, you know, a budget problem doesn't necessarily arrive as a new initiative. Sometimes it's an existing program um with staffing contracts or operating costs that have gradually increased. So, is there a way to to manage that at the same time?

Absolutely. You know, one of the intentions behind this is getting public engagement and sending a survey out. What do you think of these services? And that will give council a framework to see how the public is receiving the service and whether or not the service level is meeting expectations, whether it's below or whether it's above. Those will be considerations for council because that's council's feedback is the service levels. Are they appropriate for the services we're we're providing. For instance, this year we've had an issue with Boulevard maintenance and it's one of our our number one complaints that we've received. We're actioning that outside of the budget process with what we've got with our existing compliment.

Having said that, our intention is to bring forward those issues that have arisen in the year uh to bring some of those service considerations for council for some of those areas that uh we need to look at as well as uh the existing services and value for money. Uh, I know that that's what council is looking for in the metrics and that new software system is really going to help us transform that budget process to be much more inclusive and provide much more detailed information to council and the public for the ongoing operations for the tax dollars that people put into our community. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, I'm aware just because of how long I've been around the table that eventually there's some big axes on the wall that tend to be looming larger in certain years than others, but they're always going to be there, whether it's police services, sewer services, sometimes they're outside of our control, and sometimes um they uh need uh greater perspective to keep bringing the things that we tend to forget about all the time back to the forefront. Remember that we need to uh set aside uh funding for the day when the big changes have to be made. Uh whether it's, you know, new buildings, new equipment, uh new infrastructure, it all gets very hard to balance if they all show up at the same time. So, uh, one thing that I would like to see come back with our budget process is to try to capture a few of the accesses that are on the wall, uh, each year uh, just to review them and put them in perspective and

work towards our long-term plan for how we'll get there. Um, and that that's just sort of the the one part of the the review. uh plan that we have before us that uh I feel needs to be fleshed out a little bit. There's and I know we've talked about them, but um most of the time we've said, you know, we're running as fast as we can. We can't get to that this year and uh until it absolutely can't be avoided and then we're in it. We got to deal with it. So, I'm I'm hoping that we will at least try to um identify those. so that we don't forget about them as we get gleeful.

One of one of the intentions behind the budget process is we have a number of master plans, those that have been approved, those that are in process. And what we don't want to have is council have to lift up all of these different plans and cross reference and come back. Our intention is to show what those uh proposed amendments were to the master plans that are adopted so that they get wrapped into the budget process. But also really important is our operational plan which will say this is what we intended to achieve this year. This is what we achieved and these are the pieces that we weren't able to get to.

You look at council's motion tracker as well. There's a number of motions that are outstanding that we need to bring to the forefront and those motions don't go off into the ether per se but council turns their attention to the ones that are still outstanding that should form part of that budget process. So the intention is to wrap the strategic plan, the operational plan and the financial plan along with the survey of the residents so council has a complete picture when you're looking at the budget so you're not losing those pieces uh councelor day um that you've spoken about here. Yeah, I think the the difficulty has been that uh um the a lot of our planning is has been done uh what should our plan be for X Y or Zed and it hasn't really put all those pieces together. So hopefully we get there, but I think it's important if we plan for it, we we'll we'll carve a little piece off each year.

Um have you spoken already? Uh, councelor Jordison. Well, okay, I'll speak for the first time. So, I I quickly talked to you about this uh Mr. Johnson uh before the meeting and that's the the uh this what came from a citizen great idea and that is how we select which service to that we we review and that riskbased um uh approach is a really good approach and I'll I'll just send you all the criteria. uh uh I came up with my own and some were suggested to me. So that's one thing that I I think that we need to have. The second thing is given the affordability pressures right now um you know I think we need to have um specific a specific process for identifying savings or and prioritizing services before we start asking t taxpayers for additional revenue. So I think that's important. That's the second thing. And the last thing is my biggest B in my bonnet. And yes, I'm sorry I came from the private world, but the the way that

we do budgeting is just ass backwards to me. We we look at all our costs and then we then we start matching revenues to it and start tax increases. But I think uh that the starting place that we have to start at is we have a good idea what our NCT is, our new construction taxes are. We know what the previous taxes are. You put inflation in there. you know, we can come up with a fairly plus or minus 5 10% of what that revenue is going to be. And and the reason why I think we have to look at it from that side of the fence instead of going with cost, it happens to us every year here.

And it's not just here, it's every council. It's the CRD. We all look at everybody wants this, they want that, everyone's got a pet project. And then the bill comes in at the end of the year and then the staff look at us and go, "Well, you guys approved it all. So, what do you want us to do?" So, that's not fair to you. Like, it's not fair because then we're going back. Well, we'll cut it, you know, like uh don't ask us and and but yet we approved it because it's so easy to approve things peacemeal because you don't understand what the impact is to to your revenues.

So I think you have we have to start thinking differently. I'd like to get that other different thinking cap on. This is what our revenues are and if we want to stay in there within within that and keep taxes low, you know, we try to match costs as we go along and we can still do single single approvals but we'll understand the impacts as we're going along. So I'd like that approach. I totally I'd like to flip the pyramid the way that we think and because It happens every time, every year. And we we look at each other and we say the same darn thing. Geez, I wish did it differently.

But it's the way that's embedded in municipal government right now. That's how they do things. So, and if there is if there is going to we're going to be asking for tax increases, at least we'll consciously know what we're going to be doing. We don't have to worry about after the fact and say, "H how are we going to message this?" You know, we'll know right up front. So go ahead Jason. Thank you. and and part of uh the mandate that council has given to me was look at how do how do we rationalize some of the services we've done and we've done that uh throughout this year and that will be reflected in the upcoming budget to show where that rationalization of services has happened but we live by the ethos of better is possible in everything that we do and there's better work that can be done here and what Miss McClennon has outlined I think is a is a good process good improvements That's not to say that this is the

panacea to solving them all at this point, but council will provide direction to staff to ensure that we're meeting what your expectations are. And the intention of this report was to say this is the framework and what are some of the other value ads that council would like to see and we'll take under those under advisement and bring those forward to council through the budget process. Okay. Um, councelor Jordison. Thank you, Mayor. Um, just further to um what the mayor said, I I think uh we need to I think council needs to establish what affordability means and um like where in these guiding principles does affordability for the taxpayer sit? And I guess what I'm trying to say is I I think council needs to decide um or provide direction about the tax increase council considers acceptable before the draft budget is even constructed. And then um in and then the same thing before considering new initiatives. council um should be shown the projected tax increase requires um to maintain existing service

levels and then from there we can establish existing services and new staffing, new initiatives and the capital and debt and and that sort of thing. So I think I think that just makes it more transparent. So that was just my comment. Thank you. Thank you very much. uh my concert day. I'll be very quick because I know it is my second time speaking to this item, but I've been asked in previous years to decide before I've seen anything what percentage tax increase I would find tolerable. And I can't do that. I need to know what it's going to cost to keep the lights on and the car running and the rain from coming through the roof. I don't want to know, you know, what pet projects we can afford to do. Um so I I think we need to start with that baseline first of all.

uh just what is the what is the smallest um for the for the core services to continue to exist and then work our magic from there. Thank you. Thank you very much. We're all singing from the same song sheet here. So, um I I know with the motion that's been recommended, but we want to make some alterations. Can Can we do this? How how do you suggest we do this, Mr. Mr. Johnson? This is just the overview report. Council will have the opportunity to shape the process in another uh upcoming meeting where we'll say here's here's the process. What's your expectation with more details than what you see here today? Okay. Because the motion is to endorse.

So I'm just wait. It's to endorse the approach and we've we've heard council's feedback and we'll come back with amendments to that. So, we don't need a motion then right at this point in time. Okay, that's great. Um, well, that's great. Thank you. I appreciate that. So, the uh I'll move on to uh uh we added 8.6 which is the age friendly community plan review engagement strategy. Um over to you councelor day. Thank you. Uh, I just wanted to speak to the age friendly plan because I I feel that we're at risk of having the same uh rinse and repeat happen here, which is that we go to a great deal of trouble.

We engage a bunch of people to get information and feedback and then we put the plan back on the shelf and nothing happens with it. So, my big bright idea uh was not huge. It's a small ask and I'm asking that it come back at the budget time to uh use that building of the age friendly plan to jump off and engage with people and then have in our budget one or $2,000 for a capital project to support the age friendly plan. I don't know if it's going to be a bench, a picnic table, an event where there's intergenerational participation, but and I'm not asking for you to decide what that number is now, but I'm saying it makes a lot of sense if you're going to go to all this trouble to engage your public and talk about what they need and try to make things better in our community for our age in place. um intergenerational uh awareness. Uh let's put some money with that so that uh at least for the

effort uh people feel they got something out of it. Thank you. Thank you very much Jordan. Sorry. Thank you, mayor. I just wanted to um I guess I was just concerned that again um following what councelor Day said that it might just be the kind of same document and I just want to make sure that we don't inadvertently define age friendly primarily through um an active transportation lens. Um you know for an 80 or 90 year old resident being age friendly may mean just a a bench halfway up the hill or accessible parking or a washroom close by. Um, so I think the success of this review isn't going to be whether we produce a good age friendly community plan, but whether an older resident can eventually point to something and call that and and say that that made it easier for me to continue living in my community. Um, but I really do appreciate what's been brought forward and um and uh I just uh I I hope we're gonna figure out a way to maybe reach the senior who isn't so connected

to um like Charleum or Wandafuca uh senior society or community organization. Um so like I'm thinking like a person that is aging alone in their own home and someone who doesn't use social media or a person that doesn't drive. um that that those make um actually those are probably some of the the people whose experiences we need to understand the most, right? But I I really appreciate that um you're involving the the younger generation. Um I think that's a really cool idea. So thank you so much. Thank you very much. Okay. Uh that was just receipt anyway. So I'm going to move on uh to number nine, which thank you very much for the input.

U councelor Jordison and councelor D on that. Very uh important points that you've made. Um let's go to uh section 9 bylaws uh proposed development permit delegation bylaw. Um Mr. Johnson, I guess that that report is pretty self-explanatory. There is an exception though that uh I I'd like to make to this. That's uh 1764 Island Highway. We want to change that to to u council approval authority. Um any other comments uh council on the on the report? Uh councelor Jordison, please. Uh thank you, Mayor. I've actually found some inconsistencies in this and um uh yeah, I just wanted to bring them forward here. Just um let me see where they are.

Uh so there's a an AB section um what is it in the bylaw? It's actually in the bylaw. Um and it says that um um master plan community means um lands that are subject to an area plan and it like it has an A and B section and then it says uh for the purpose of this bylaw the following are designated as master plan communities. the one, two, three. But then it says, "Council may bylaw amendment designate additional areas as master planned communities where the agreement where the requirements of paragraphs A and B have been satisfied." And I I guess I can understand that for A, but B is have been designated by council by bylaw as a master plan community for the purpose of this bylaw.

So feel I feel like we're just doing like that circle thing. So it may be just a a miss. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you for very much for the question. So it would be an amending bylaw. So a bylaw amendment to add a new master plan community to this bylaw. Okay. Um Okay. So bylaw amendment. Okay. That makes sense. Um what's the other one here? Sorry, there was one other one. Uh the four uh unit threshold um has an odd integration with the moratorum. Um the report notes that council has already directed a moratorium on form of character permits for developments for four units or fewer although the four unit threshold remains in the delegation bylaw. That's the other question I had.

Yeah, thank you for the question. And so the four units really is a delegated authority threshold. Um so we had to develop that threshold of four units to be clear that developments of more than four units would require approval from council. So it's simply just a threshold only. Um as you mentioned developments of four units or less um currently have a moratorum placed on the requirement for a form and character development permit. Um I would add for those developments if they fall within an environmental or hazard development permit area they would still require that development. That moratorum is only for form and character development permits. Okay. Thank you for the explanation.

Any other uh questions? Um, can I get a motion to for the recommendation with the with the exception of the change of 1764 island being changed to council approval authority. Okay. Thank you councelor Olsen and councelor uh board discussion. Not seeing any further discussion. I'll call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Thank you very much. Uh 9.2 is don't have to deal with now. And we are at um 9.3. Okay. Um over to the corporate officer, please. Thank you, Rorup. It is Callwood land use bylaw number 151 1989 amendment 227 Schmoo uh bylaw 2091 2025 for adoption. Motion please. Thank you. Uh councelor uh Jensen and councelor Olen. Uh discussion.

Um call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. Next one please. 94 CO land use bylaw number 151989 amendment 233 CD45 uh for 221 Goldfinch Road and this is for adoption. Okay. Um thank you council Ward. Second council Jensen discussion call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none motion carries. Next please. Sewer local area service enlargement amendment bylaws going for first, second, and third reading. Callwood central sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw 480 uh for L enlargement for 605 Hulser Drive and CO main seal area establishment and loan authorization bylaw. Uh that is for L enlargement for 605 Hulser Drive. Okay. Uh Uh, Council Grove. Second, please. Uh, councelor Jordison.

Discussion, please. Seeing no discussion, call the question. Any opposed? Seeing none, motion carries. And the last one, please. Sewer local area service enlargement amendment bylaws. All going for adoption. Uh, Callwood Main Sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw for 3110 Wishart Road. Cowwood main sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw for 3155 Wood Park Drive and Cowwood Main Sewer local area service establishment and loan authorization bylaw for 3112 Wood Park Drive. Okay. Uh same same mover and then uh seconder Grove and Jordison discussion. Seeing none question any opposed seeing none. Motion carries. And before I move into camera, I want to take this opportunity right now to say a very very fond farewell to our fire chief, Brian Irwin. Brian, thank you for your many years service here in the city of Collwood. Uh Brian, uh for those that don't know, he's decided to go to the dark side.

Am I allowed to say that? Uh no, I mean, I just want to thank you, uh Brian, just on behalf of the entire city and uh all all the all the citizens. You've served this community so so so well. I'm going to personally miss you. Uh you're you're one of those uh guys that I can I can have a coffee with in the noble from you. You get the honest uh absolutely honest uh stuff from you. So I just want to take this opportunity, Brian, because I understand um you're not you're not going till the end. What you won't be fit here for the next meeting. So I thought I'd take this opportunity at this point in time. Um, I should have probably done it under mayor's message to to thank you so much and uh we do wish you all the best and I'm confident you're going to just do so well. You'll probably be the fire chief over there next. He goes, "No thanks. No fire chief." Anyways, again, uh Brian, uh thank you

to you and and your entire family. Got the opportunity to meet your family and uh it's uh it's been a real pleasure to have you. And I'm sure we're going to be doing something here formally uh you know within the city. So uh this won't be the last of it. Thank you. Okay. Can we get the motion for to go in camera please? Thank you very much. Second. Thank you Jordison. Seconder discussion seeing none uh motion carries.