Council revisited the proposed zoning for Millstream Meadows, 1965 Millstream Road, but did not vote on the first and second readings listed for reconsideration. Instead, it carried a motion asking the Capital Regional District (CRD) to bring forward a new rezoning application, with measurable environmental targets and a requirement to keep rainwater and stormwater on site. Debate centred on whether the current proposal could meet the community’s regenerative-development goals, claims that zoning had sharply reduced the land’s value, and who can make an application: the CRD holds title, but the province retains rights that affect what can be done. The next step depends on the CRD deciding whether to prepare an application and obtaining the province’s confirmation; staff said the advertised September 8 public hearing would be cancelled if the bylaw did not proceed.
Generated from the recording's captions and the official minutes.
Routine: adopt the meeting agenda, adding Scott Richardson to the speakers under Petitions and Delegations.
Official wording: THAT the August 26, 2026 Special Council Meeting Agenda be adopted as amended to add Scott Richardson to speak under Petitions and Delegations.
A delegation presenter thanked Council and staff for their work, saying that community preference had initially been to rezone the properties, while regenerative development had emerged as a compromise. The presenter asked how property assessments and possible treaty negotiations related to the decision. A second person sent a written submission that was circulated to Council and was to be added to the public record, but did not speak at the meeting.
3.1 Reconsideration of RZ-02-15 Reintroduction and Proposed Zone - 1965 Millstream Road ("Millstream Meadows")
The mayor explained that reconsideration would let Council revisit whether the proposed zoning bylaw should move through the legislative process; it would not itself enact the bylaw. The proposal followed earlier Council direction to prepare zoning, hold a public hearing and gather feedback, alongside the South Highlands Local Area Plan and Official Community Plan work. The mayor then moved on to the related zoning item without a separate decision on this briefing.
Agreement
Reconsideration would give Council another chance to decide whether the proposed bylaw should advance; it would not enact the bylaw.
3.2 RZ-02-15 Reintroduction and Proposed Zone - 1965 Millstream Road ("Millstream Meadows")
The mayor argued that the proposed commercial and industrial regenerative-development zones could preserve the South Highlands plan’s intent while helping address reported land-value losses of 66% to 90%. A councillor cited the district’s open-house survey, in which eight people responded, and said respondents placed little importance on remediation-cost recovery, showed weak support for some industrial, composting and recycling uses, and wanted measurable net-positive results. Another councillor questioned why the province was pressing for a resolution. Council considered giving the bylaw first and second readings as amended, but the motion was not seconded and no vote was taken on it. Instead, Council carried a motion to write to the CRD welcoming a new application and setting out guidance: draw on local plans and public input; include measurable targets for areas such as water, waste, energy, carbon and ecology; show at least one target as net positive; keep rainwater and stormwater on site, with any excess supporting ecological flows; and identify how targets would be enforceable. A councillor supported asking the CRD to bring a proposal rather than having district staff create one. The CRD representative explained that the CRD is listed as owner, but a provincial reverter clause means provincial confirmation would be needed before rezoning could proceed. Staff said the September 8 public-hearing notice had already been advertised to meet notice deadlines and that a cancellation notice would be published if the hearing did not go ahead.
Agreement
Several councillors supported seeking a concrete proposal from the CRD rather than trying to draft one without a development plan or measurable targets.
The carried direction calls for measurable performance targets and requires rainwater and stormwater to be retained and used on site, with excess supporting ecological flows.
Any rezoning application would need provincial confirmation because of the condition attached to the land transfer.
Disagreement
The mayor argued that proceeding with commercial and industrial zoning could help correct reported losses in property value without abandoning environmental goals; a councillor pointed to the small open-house survey and limited support for industrial and certain composting and recycling uses.
A councillor questioned the province’s urgency and requested an explanation; the CRD representative described the province’s rights over the property, while another councillor argued that the CRD could still bring a request forward and seek provincial permission.
Change the first consideration in the proposed letter so it asks the applicant to craft a proposal drawing on the local area plan, the regenerative development designation, Development Permit Area 4, and community input—not to craft the zone itself.
Official wording: THAT item a) be amended to read:
that a proposal be crafted by the applicant, drawing on the South Highlands Local Area Plan, the Regenerative Development Official Community Plan Designation, Development Permit Area 4, and the community input received through the process to date;
Write to the Capital Regional District, as the site owner, to invite it to submit a new rezoning proposal. The letter would ask the proposal to draw on local plans and community input, include measurable goals for areas such as water, waste, energy, and habitat, and make at least one goal demonstrably net positive. It would also ask that rain and stormwater be managed on site, allow the owner to offer a community amenity voluntarily, and identify how each proposed goal could be made enforceable. Council would accept the application and waive the usual waiting period for reapplying.
Official wording: THAT a letter be written to the Capital Regional District to advise that the District of Highlands Council would welcome a new rezoning application for 1965 Millstream Road, prepared and submitted by the Capital Regional District as owner, and that the following considerations be conveyed for Council's benefit in assessing such an application:
that a proposal be crafted by the applicant, drawing on the South Highlands Local Area Plan, the Regenerative Development designation, Development Permit Area 4, and the community input received through the process to date;
that the application include measurable performance metrics addressing some or all of water, waste, stormwater, energy/carbon, and ecology/habitat;
that the metrics need not meet a full Regenerative Development standard in every category, but that one or more metrics be demonstrably net positive against a stated baseline as per date of Certificate of Compliance;
that all rainwater and stormwater falling on the site be used on site, with any excess being used to support ecological flows;
that the application may identify a community amenity offered voluntarily by the applicant in support of the application;
that the application identify, for each proposed metric, the instrument by which it would be made enforceable (zone text, amended Development Permit Area guidelines) under sections 490 and 491 of the Local Government Act ;
AND THAT Council confirm it will receive such an application, and that any re-application interval under the District's development application procedures be waived for this purpose.