Council approved moving Carnarvon Park’s $30.3 million redevelopment forward with its current design, including the green roof and 24-space childcare area, despite uncertainty about childcare demand and the loss of a hoped-for grant. After rejecting a proposal to fund 75% from reserves, Council settled on a 50/50 split between reserves and long-term borrowing; it also chose a borrowing route that avoids a separate elector-approval process. Several councillors questioned whether the project’s scale and long-term costs leave enough room for other municipal priorities, while supporters stressed the park’s community value and the cost of further delay. Council also approved a new recreation software contract, reviewed a clean 2025 audit, and advanced a council remuneration policy and bylaw that take effect with the next council term.
Generated from the recording's captions and the official minutes.
Routine: adopt the minutes of the two April 27, 2026 Council meetings.
Official wording: That the following minutes be adopted:
Regular Council Meeting held on April 27, 2026 at 6:00 PM; and
Regular Council Meeting held on April 27, 2026 at 7:00 PM.
Two residents spoke. One urged Council to keep childcare in the Carnarvon Park redevelopment, describing the shortage of infant and toddler places and the strain on working families, including health-care workers. The other submitted a petition with about 200 supporters and suggested limiting development in Uplands to a main home, a suite and one accessory dwelling unit, all under common ownership, to protect the neighbourhood’s historic character and tree canopy. The mayor noted provincial rules require at least four units on many lots and limit what the District can restrict.
Disagreement
The childcare speaker urged Council not to drop the proposed childcare space; staff later presented the possibility of replacing it with multipurpose space.
The Uplands speaker argued for tighter limits on the form of development; the mayor said provincial legislation limits the District’s ability to impose such restrictions.
6.1.1 Draft Streets, Parks and Facilities Naming and Renaming Policy
Council added a requirement to consult affected neighbours in the 291 King George Terrace subdivision about renumbering mailing addresses. Council then received the naming and renaming policy report for information and directed staff to engage residents of Prince Andrew Crescent about possible street renaming.
Agreement
Council supported consulting affected neighbours before deciding how addresses in the King George Terrace subdivision should be renumbered.
The amended recommendation and the report were approved without opposition.
Add a requirement for staff to consult affected neighbours of the 291 King George Terrace subdivision about renumbering mailing addresses.
Official wording: That the motion be amended to include:
3. That staff include consultation with the affected neighbours of the 291 King George Terrace subdivision regarding renumbering of mailing addresses.
Receive the naming and renaming policy report for information, engage Prince Andrew Crescent residents about a possible street renaming, and consult affected neighbours of the 291 King George Terrace subdivision about mailing-address renumbering.
Official wording: That the report titled "Draft Streets, Parks and Facilities Naming and Renaming Policy" authored by Michelle Hunt, Chief Administrative Officer, dated April 20, 2026, be received for information.
That staff be directed to engage with the residents of Prince Andrew Crescent regarding potential renaming of that street.
That staff include consultation with the affected neighbours of the 291 King George Terrace subdivision regarding renumbering of mailing addresses.
Council approved the scope of the second phase of the development-process review, subject to a preliminary report returning to Council with key performance indicators before final sign-off on the projects.
Agreement
Council supported the project scope and the added checkpoint for a preliminary report.
Make approval of the project scope subject to Council first approving a preliminary report that seeks direction on the desired outcomes and performance measures.
Official wording: That the motion be amended to:
That Council approve the scope of Part 2 of the Optimize Development Processes project as outlined in the Project Sign Off for Council Priority Project #78 - Optimize Development Processes (Part 2) with the inclusion subject to the approval of a preliminary report to Council seeking direction of defined outcomes and Key Performance Indicators.
Approve the next phase of the development-process improvement project, but only after Council approves a preliminary report seeking direction on its intended outcomes and performance measures.
Official wording: That Council approve the scope of Part 2 of the Optimize Development Processes project as outlined in the Project Sign Off for Council Priority Project #78 - Optimize Development Processes (Part 2) subject to the approval of a preliminary report to Council seeking direction of defined outcomes and Key Performance Indicators.
Council approved restructuring the work to implement the updated Official Community Plan (OCP) into four distinct priority projects. The work includes pre-zoning, an infrastructure servicing study and a new subdivision works and services bylaw. A councillor supported the package but wanted continued Council oversight of the servicing study.
Agreement
Council approved the four-project package.
Disagreement
A councillor supported the package but remained concerned about how long it might be before Council could review the infrastructure servicing study.
Split the existing Official Community Plan implementation project into four projects: pre-zoning, an infrastructure servicing study, a new subdivision and servicing bylaw, and updated home-business rules. Approve the project plans for all four, including a review of midblock infill housing zoning in the pre-zoning work.
Official wording: That Council restructure Council Priority Project #76 into four distinct Council Priority Projects, as follows: Council Priority Project #76 - Complete Pre-Zoning to Implement the 2025 Official Community Plan
Council Priority Project #96 - Complete Infrastructure Servicing Study
Council Priority Project #97 - Develop New Subdivision, Works and Services Bylaw
Council Priority Project #98 - Update Home-based Business Regulation
That Council approve the Project Sign Off for Council Priority Project #76 - Complete Pre-Zoning to Implement the 2025 Official Community Plan as outlined in Attachment 1 of the report titled "Council Sign-Off - Council Priority Projects to Implement the Updated Official Community Plan", authored by Andre Boel, Director Community Building and Planning dated April 20, 2026 and that the Council Priority Project include a review of midblock infill housing zoning under the modernization zoning task in the staff report.
That Council approve the Project Sign Off for Council Priority Project #96 - Infrastructure Servicing Study as outlined in Attachment 2 of the report titled "Council Sign-Off - Four Council Priority Projects to Implement the Updated Official Community Plan", authored by Andre Boel, Director Community Building and Planning dated April 20, 2026.
That Council approve the Project Sign Off for Council Priority Project #97 - Develop New Subdivision, Works and Services Bylaw as outlined in Attachment 3 of the report titled "Council Sign-Off - Four Council Priority Projects to Implement the Updated Official Community Plan", authored by Andre Boel, Director Community Building and Planning dated April 20, 2026.
That Council approve the Project Sign Off for Council Priority Project #98 - Update Home-based Business Regulations as outlined in Attachment 4 of the report titled "Council Sign-Off - Four Council Priority Projects to Implement the Updated Official Community Plan", authored by Andre Boel, Director Community Building and Planning dated April 20, 2026, as amended.
Council approved a community engagement plan for updating home-based business rules. An amendment to remove a proposed stricter limit on non-resident employees failed, so that topic will remain in the material for consultation. The approved plan will return to Council after the consultation.
Agreement
Council agreed to consult the community on proposed home-based business rule changes and bring the results back.
Disagreement
Councillor Watson and Councillor Smart argued that limits on non-resident employees would be difficult to enforce and could be unnecessary.
Councillor Green wanted the business community consulted before removing the proposed limit; Councillor Patterson argued the limit could help address community concerns. The mayor also opposed striking it.
Remove the proposed endorsement of the home-business rule updates and engagement plan, including the proposed additional business-community engagement, tighter limits on non-resident employees, and operating-hours options.
Official wording: That the motion be amended to strike:
That Council endorse the proposed updates and community engagement plan, as presented in the report titled: "Recommendations and Engagement for CPP#98 Update to Home-Based Business Regulations" authored by Colin Brown, Senior Planner - Housing Policy with the following amendments: To include an additional and separate dedicated engagement opportunity with the business community,
To include stricter limits on non-resident employees, and
To include options for hours of operation for business operations.
Endorse the proposed home-business rule updates and public-engagement plan, with a separate engagement opportunity for the business community, stricter limits on non-resident employees, and options for business operating hours.
Official wording: That Council endorse the proposed updates and community engagement plan, as presented in the report titled: "Recommendations and Engagement for CPP#98 Update to Home-Based Business Regulations" authored by Colin Brown, Senior Planner - Housing Policy with the following amendments: To include an additional and separate dedicated engagement opportunity with the business community,
To include stricter limits on non-resident employees, and
To include options for hours of operation for business operations.
7.1 Project Update - Carnarvon Park Redevelopment Plan
parks environment1 public speaker31:18 Watch · Read
Staff reported that the design was about 60% complete and the estimated project cost remained $30.3 million. Replacing the green roof with a standard roof and solar panels was expected to save money while retaining net-zero energy performance. Staff also questioned whether the planned 24-place childcare space for ages three to five was still needed, citing 164 new school-district spaces planned in or near Oak Bay, including 48 in Oak Bay. Councillors raised concerns about the shortage of infant and toddler care, the loss of the green roof, the uncertainty of projected school spaces, and the project’s long-term cost. Council ultimately kept the design as presented and asked staff to return with a Class A cost estimate, a more detailed estimate used before tendering. It chose a 50% reserve and 50% borrowing funding model after rejecting a 75% reserve and 25% borrowing alternative, and approved using the District’s approval-free liability zone for borrowing. Staff expected to return with further detail, including final design and costs.
Agreement
Council wanted the park redevelopment to move forward and staff to return with a Class A cost estimate.
Council ultimately retained the current design, including the green roof and childcare space.
Council approved a 50/50 split between reserves and long-term borrowing and use of the approval-free liability zone.
Disagreement
Councillors differed on whether to retain the childcare space for ages three to five given projected school-district places, the current local shortage, and uncertainty about future needs. Some also raised the possibility of infant and toddler care.
Some councillors supported keeping the green roof for its environmental, aesthetic and community benefits; others favoured a conventional roof with solar panels to reduce cost and complexity.
Councillors disagreed about the project’s scale and the strain it could place on reserves, borrowing capacity, taxes and other capital needs.
The initial 50/50 funding proposal was defeated; a 75/25 reserve-to-debt alternative was also defeated before the 50/50 model passed.
Proceed with the Carnarvon Park redevelopment plan as presented, then bring Council a detailed cost estimate.
Official wording: 1. That Council direct staff to proceed with the Carnarvon Park Redevelopment Plan as presented and report back to Council with the Class A cost estimate.
Fund half of the park redevelopment costs from District reserves and half through long-term borrowing, and report back with borrowing details and the final cost estimate.
Official wording: 2. That Council endorse a funding model for the costs of the Carnarvon Park Redevelopment Plan that consists of 50% from District reserves and 50% from long-term borrowing and to report back on the borrowing details of this model along with the final cost estimate.
Have staff report on the effects of an alternative funding model for the park redevelopment, with 75% paid from reserves and 25% through debt.
Official wording: 2. That Council direct staff to report back with the impacts of an alternate funding model for the costs of the Carnarvon Park Redevelopment Plan that considers from 75% reserve and 25% debt.
Fund half of the park redevelopment costs from District reserves and half through long-term borrowing, and report back with borrowing details and the final cost estimate.
Official wording: 2. That Council endorse a funding model for the costs of the Carnarvon Park Redevelopment Plan that consists of 50% from District reserves and 50% from long-term borrowing and to report back on the borrowing details of this model along with the final cost estimate.
Council authorized a five-year contract with PerfectMind Inc. for recreation management software, effective June 1, 2026, at an estimated cost of $405,000 before tax. Council reported no questions and approved the contract.
Authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to sign a five-year recreation-software contract beginning June 1, 2026, estimated to cost $405,000 before tax.
Official wording: That the Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to execute a five-year contract with PerfectMind Inc for recreation management software, effective June 1, 2026, at an estimated cost of $405,000 excluding tax.
Staff reported $22.1 million in capital additions in 2025, a $15.2 million accounting surplus and a much smaller $400,000 budgetary surplus. The external auditor reported a clean, unqualified audit opinion, no significant internal-control deficiencies and only minor adjustments, including $133,000 in revenue that no longer needed to be deferred. Council approved the financial information and received the audit findings and the annual report on development and amenity cost charges. The meeting was extended to allow business to continue.
Agreement
Council approved the 2025 Statement of Financial Information and received the audit and cost-charge reports.
Councillors praised staff’s work and the clean audit.
Disagreement
Councillor Braithweight asked whether reserve levels remained appropriate, why the investment policy threshold was temporarily exceeded and whether council expense controls should be clearer; staff said the investment measure was a year-end snapshot and not a cause for alarm.
Approve the District’s 2025 financial information statement and receive the 2025 audit findings and development and amenity cost charges annual reports.
Official wording: That Council approve the 2025 Statement of Financial Information as presented in Attachment 1 of the report titled “2025 Statement of Financial Information and Audit Findings Report”, authored by Rianna Lachance, Director of Finance and Asset Management, dated May 11, 2026;
That Council receive the KPMG LLP 2025 Audit Findings Report presented in Attachment 2.
That Council receive the 2025 Development Cost Charges and Amenity Cost Charges Annual Report presented in Attachment 3.
Staff supported an Uplands Siting and Design permit for a covered arbor, hot tub and related landscaping and hardscaping at 3490 Beach Drive. The Advisory Design Panel had recommended approval, and Council approved the application. The mayor noted that planned process changes could eventually keep relatively minor applications from needing a Council decision.
Agreement
Council approved the application; staff had no concerns and the design panel recommended approval.
Council adopted the amendment to the boulevard frontage tax bylaw. It also asked staff to report on the environmental and cost implications of the taxed boulevard maintenance program as part of the 2027 budget process.
Agreement
Council approved the bylaw and agreed that further information on cost and environmental impacts would help inform the 2027 budget.
Have staff report during the 2027 budget process on the environmental effects and costs of the taxed boulevard maintenance program.
Official wording: That staff bring a report to Council that outlines the environmental and cost considerations around the taxed boulevard maintenance program as part of the 2027 budget process.
The Oak Bay Beach Hotel sought to add six spa-related areas, with capacity for 18 people, to its existing liquor-primary licence. Council asked whether the change would affect the spa’s age rules or allow drinks to be carried outside the licensed area; staff could not confirm the age-rule effect and believed drinks would be limited to licensed areas. Council chose to make no comment to the provincial regulator.
Agreement
Council approved staff’s recommendation to opt out of commenting on the referral.
Disagreement
Councillors raised questions about how the licence would affect age limits and movement between the spa and other hotel areas; the answers were not conclusive.
Tell the provincial liquor regulator that Council will not comment on the hotel’s application to add six spa areas, for 18 people, to its liquor licence.
Official wording: That Council direct staff to provide an ‘opt out of comment’ response to the BC Liquor and Cannabis Regulation Branch for a structural change application to the Oak Bay Beach Hotel’s existing liquor primary license to increase the license capacity by adding 6 additional areas (18 persons) associated with the hotel spa to the liquor primary license
Staff compared Oak Bay council pay with other municipalities: average comparator pay was $76,271 for mayors and $32,350 for councillors. The proposed changes would add about $40,000, or 0.009% to taxation, and take effect when the next council is sworn in on November 2. Council approved the remuneration policy and gave the bylaw first, second and third readings; it will return later for adoption. A councillor asked whether future reviews could happen earlier in an election year, but staff said the comparison depends on consumer price index data released in January.
Agreement
Council approved formalizing the remuneration policy and advancing the bylaw.
The changes will apply from the start of the next council term, not to the current term.