Transcript: Regular Council - 28 Sep 2026

I don't know.

Good evening. I'd like to call our council meeting on Monday, September 28th to order at 6 PM. I'm Mayor McNeel Smith and we have five of our council members uh in the chamber this evening and one participating online. To my far left, councelor Novik, Councelor O'Keefe, and Councilman Tulle. To my far right, Councelor Duncan and Councelor Ganette. And online, good evening to uh Councelor Duck. Did you want to perhaps test your video and audio, please? Sure. Good evening and thank you very much. Um I don't know if I have video because of signal, but I am here in audio. Thank you. Thank you. And uh hello to uh to members of staff in attendance this evening. Uh we do introduce staff uh as they are providing information to council uh and to hello to members of the public uh both here in the council chamber this evening to those who may be watching the live webcast and a hello to those who may be watching a recording of the meeting at a later date. I want to

respectfully uh acknowledge uh that we are gathered this evening and indeed the entire town of Sydney is in the territory of the sish people. Uh today we have the uh um Seot First Nation, the Sarta First Nation, the Pacquin First Nation, the Seikken First Nation, and the Malahhat Nation. We express our gratitude to all First Nations, to all the Wasish people for their stewardship in of these lands and waters for millennia. and we respectfully uh acknowledge uh our commitment to working together for the stewardship of these lands and waters for current generations, our current generation and future generations to come. As I think uh most if not everyone knows, uh this Wednesday is National Truth and Reconciliation Day. I encourage all of us to reflect upon our relationships with First Nations and the pow-wow that is held at Royal Athletic Park will have many thousands of people participating and is a great experience uh for those who haven't been. In turning to the approval of the agenda since it was

published last Thursday, uh there are some additions. Uh there are no deletions and there are some changes. I'll begin with the additions. Uh we have a item of correspondence uh that will a single item that will fall under 9A uh which is the um the variance application on cit road. Uh we have 48 pieces of correspondence that have come in since the agenda was published under item 9B uh which is the white birch uh development application. And we have uh uh one item of correspondence to go under sorry we have uh three items of correspondence uh to go under item 12A recommendation four which is uh coming out of our committee the whole meeting uh on the Bower Bank bicycle boulevard. So those are additions.

uh the changes uh the first is that uh I would like to move the mayor's report uh from item 10 to uh the last item agenda uh to the last item before adjournment. Uh that contains a motion to uh cancel our scheduled meeting on October the 5th. Uh there is no further uh business to be brought forward to council. This will be uh our final council meeting of this term. Uh apart from that resolution um I wish to provide acknowledgements uh for uh two councilors who are not seeking reelection and I would like to add to the agenda uh remarks that I would like to make uh to Sydney colleagues or to council colleagues, town staff and the Sydney community at large. So that mayor's report number 10 will go uh become the last item on the agenda.

Additionally, we have uh two other changes. One is councelor O'Keefe has requested raising item 15.2 which is a letter of correspondence. Um letters of uh correspondence for information is not normally discussed by council. Councelor O'Keeffe is raising that. It will become item 14A for for some discussion. and councelor Novc uh wishes to raise item 15.6 from correspondence from information. It will become item 14B. Uh colleagues uh with those uh additions uh and those changes I would seek a motion to approve the agenda as amended. Sorry, mayor if I may just uh to add to 11B. Certainly. Uh so we uh item 11 is council reports. We do have one council report on the agenda and um councelor Gernad has requested uh providing a quick update on tree appreciation day that occurred on the weekend and so uh if uh this motion this motion is uh will include uh that addition as well. Go ahead.

I move the uh agenda be accepted as amended. Thank you. Second. Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? Thank you. Opposed. Thank you, Councelor Duck. Uh that carries unanimous. We're next turning to approval of the minutes. Uh if I could have a motion to approve uh the minutes of our regular council meeting on September 14th. So move. Second. We have it moved and seconded. Any corrections to those minutes? Uh seeing none, those in favor? That carries unanimous? Thank you. Uh we're next turning to uh rise and report from in camera minutes. Uh on September 14th uh council met in camera in a closed meeting uh and we have the following motion to raise publicly uh for information and that resolution is that Kelly Bull Tor be renominated to the Victoria Airport Authority Board of Directors for a three-year term January 1st, 2027 to December 31st, 2029. Uh we thank u Miss Boltomer for her service uh for for the past three years on the VA board. Uh and we wish her well in the nomination process uh to continue for

another three-year term representing Sydney along with our uh other representative, Mr. Sammy Turkey. We have no business under number six, not completed at a previous meeting. We're turning to number seven, public participation opportunities. Uh we have two parts uh uh this evening. Uh the first will be public participation which will commence in just a moment. Uh and then we will have two presentations uh under 7D. Uh public participation is the regular uh time of the council meeting where we invite members of the public to come forward to address council. We ask that you keep your remarks uh to four minutes that you provide your name and the municipality that you reside in or the organization that you represent. Uh there is a little button at the bottom of the microphone to make it live. You'll see a little red light come on. Uh, and I will call for a first time anyone wishing to come forward this evening.

Good evening. Good evening, Mayor and Council. My name is Barbara Fall. I'm a resident of Sydney. Um this is the last meeting of this council and I want to take this opportunity to thank each and every one of you for your four years of service in this last term. Um it takes a lot of time, a lot of energy, a lot of courage and it's not underappreciated whether we agree or not. Uh 100% that's not the point. I think each one of you in your own way has strived to do the best that you can uh with the best of intentions and that is recognized and it is appreciated. For those of you who are not going to vive for a seat at the next term, I want to thank you particularly.

I always get emotional with goodbyes. So, you know, if if if I crack up here, that's that's where it's coming from. Um, I wish you all well in your future and really thank you for standing here and doing this job. Um, for those of you who are seeking reelection, I wish you the best of luck. I hope to see you in the council chambers again um along with new colleagues and um so from that point, thank you and you are very much appreciated. Thank you for taking the time and uh and your kind words. I'll turn to the next speaker if someone wishes to come forward.

Good evening. Just a little button at the bottom there. There we go. And the mic adjust as you wish. Thank you. Um good evening, mayor, council, staff. Uh my name is Heather Frell. I live in White Birch Road in Sydney and I'm here speaking with a lot of support from a lot of my neighbors in the subdivision surrounding 2060 proposed subdivision. Tonight I want to discuss the proposed development plan that's on the agenda tonight. Um and we will call it for what it is. It's an expired development plan under section 504 of the local government act. a development permit automatically lapses if construction is not substantially begun in two years. That's exactly what's happened here.

To put it plainly, this permit is now legally dead. September 18th, 2026. Because its lapsed, provincial legislation provides no legal me mechanism or authority for council or staff to retroactively renew or extend it. The developer cannot pick up where they left off. There is no renewal or reapplication process. They must completely start over and submit a brand new application. A brand new application from my reading would include but not limited to a brand new application fee and submission, a fully updated site and architectural package. Submission of new professional reports, the flood report is included in that I would think, which is a new report from December of 2025.

mandatory public notification signs and a multi-ep department technical review along with a full governance review. A new application is the only legal and fair path forward. It assures that this project is evaluated against current realities and the way things are today rather than outdated rules or from two to three years ago, four years ago if you're talking about the traffic report that was done. Since the original proposal, significant material changes have occurred. The town received a 2025 flood inundation report and subsequently placed a defensive flood covenant on this proposed development address. I would expect that that is to protect the city themselves from liability. Furthermore, there is intense neighborhood outrage as you can probably see some showed tonight um over some of the issues that have been unresolved are currently coming up have come up before this new proposal plan came into works along with but not limited to the traffic congestion chaotic construction parking should this go through for a 61 unit building and the impacts highlighted in the flood blood report.

Making a rush decision right now prior to the election and change of council potential is a disservice to us and the community. Therefore, we strongly urge planning staff, council, and the mayor to defer this entire matter till the incoming council following the upcoming municipal elections. We ask that you formally acknowledge the expiration of this permit under section 504. You pause the process and you direct the developer to apply for a new development permit to new council to review. Thanks for your time. Thank you for coming forward this evening. [applause] I would ask that there be no further applause. We want to respect all views in the council chamber. Thank you.

I'll turn to the next speaker who wishes to come forward. Just the mic uh just a little button to make make it live there. Okay. Uh good evening ladies and gentlemen of council. My name is Mark Lindome. I'm one of the principal owners of Marina Park Marina. Um I just want to answer this uh woman's suggestion that the development permit is um uh not a new application. It is effectively a new application. We're asking for and sought an extension. Extension was not apparently something that was permitted under your current bylaws. Um your staff will confirm that we have submitted what is essentially an entirely new uh submission of drawings, the geotechnical report, the uh flood plane report, everything is current. Um there's no suggestion that there's anything that's other than a complete and new submission. It just so happens that it's the same submission. I haven't changed anything other than some very very insubstantial matters largely coming from the new uh report as to where the um uh services in

the building could be and not below a certain geodetic height because of potential flood. And so the building has been changed very very slightly to move uh some of the services to the main floor from what used to be uh located in the parking garage. So, I want to assure you and your staff should assure you that we have complied in every respect. And you're also going to see when our project manager um introduces and um reiterates what I'm now saying with our presentation that the um that the uh substantial reason why we were delayed and unable to commence under the existing development permit is because of the technicalities of producing an airspace parcel. and this the town of Sydney and the staff. It was a new a new and technical issue that took a long long time. Not our fault. Yes. Okay.

Some things we might have done faster, but the the um the township itself has a hand in the delay. We're ready to go. We've all matters have been attended to. We're ready to have a building permit issued. So, I ask you to uh support the decision you've already made, which is that the development permit should issue as you did in uh two years ago. Thank you. Thank you for coming forward. And yes, we do have a presentation u shortly coming on the agenda and you're certainly welcome to join your your representatives at that time as well. Uh please come forward to to the mic. question.

No. Is there a way of formally responding to that? Uh, no. We've listened to your views and we've listened to the other uh views. We do have uh at least one participant on live. I want to um to ask uh Mr. Mark Ashby if uh you would like to connect and I will uh I see you. Um if you can just test your audio and I will turn the floor to you for four minutes. Uh test test. Yeah, please go ahead. Okay. Thank you mayor and council for the opportunity to speak uh tonight. Um I am of course addressing 2240 James White Boulevard uh which was discussed to the committee of the whole meeting last week. Uh I just wanted to provide a very quick update to mayor and council on a few of the uh or on the status of the appeal. And uh there were three questions raised related to the location of the three-bedroom suites, the location of condensers for the heat pumps and also the possibility of retaining one of the trees. Uh that required some input from our technical team. Uh so I do have some news on that.

Uh the appeal was submitted uh last week. We expect it to be on the building code appeals agenda on October 15th. So we should have an answer two to three days after that. Um so uh that is moving along. Uh that was done with the cooperation of staff. So we do appreciate it. Um the question of the location of the three-bedroom suite which is proposed for the third story uh boils down to structure. We did look at this um initially um and the structural engineer confirmed last week that um uh we simply don't have enough aligned sheer wall in that suite layout in order to move it to a lower story. Um it would be disruptive for the structure. Um they also confirmed that um uh using steel a steel moment frame um in that story is not something in their words that would be practical or economically feasible.

Um so that's informed the decision to move it to an upper level. Um the condensers um uh so the distance between the condenser and the interior of the suites is not really an issue. Um so uh moving them further away from the suites is possible. The challenge is the A2L refrigerant which is used in modern compressors um uh is required to be in a fire separated shaft as it passes through adjacent suites. Um so the advice from the mechanical engineer was uh the three condensers serving the top three suites could easily be on the roof. Um so that's possible. um the stories below um in their words um uh it's not feasible to um move the condensers to the roof. Um but potentially another location that's on the same story is a possibility. Um but we do think we have them in the best possible place both for the suit and for the intent of the zoning bylaw. Um and I think that's supported by staff.

Uh finally on the tree retention uh the ponderosa pine um is located outside the building footprints. Um it's not impossible to keep it um uh but uh the concern is that um some of the structural roots might intersect the zone of excavation for the foundation. Um our the advice from our arborist is to have this tree listed as TBD to be determined um and to assess the feasibility of keeping it um once excavation starts and we can determine whether structural roots are going to be affected by the footprint of the building. Um the owner is supportive of that. Nobody wants to see the tree go away necessarily. Um but uh we do have to be real about um potentially leaving a tree as a hazard to this building or something else. Um so uh we have to be practical about uh the possibility of saving it. Um I do also want to point out that we do need a path going to the back. um keeping the tree will mean realigning the path, which is also possible, but it's um going to um uh

make it impossible to add another tree in that zone. So, it's not both and it's either or when it comes to the trees that are located at the back. Um but uh that's uh what we've learned from our consultants. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Ashby for providing the update on the building code appeal board uh process timing uh and your other information as this is this council's last uh meeting uh and uh should your application continue to move forward it would be coming to the next council and we encourage you to uh to bring that information to uh to a future meeting as well. Thank you.

Uh we did uh have another uh speaker uh register uh for public participation but we're not I'm just confirming with our uh corporate officer that they haven't joined the meeting. So I will turn down back to the room if uh there's anyone wishing to come forward to address council please. Good evening. Good evening, your worship, members of council. Um, my name is Eric Delarm, development manager at High Street Ventures. Uh, and I'm here this evening regarding bylaw 2317 for our property at 99723rd Street, which is before council today for adoption. I'd like to briefly provide some context on the application and clarify uh what we're asking council to consider tonight.

So, the eastern portion of the property, as we've previously discussed, um has changed from RM7 to RM6R with the intent of preserving rental housing in Sydney. Now, through the first three readings of the zoning application, we heard council's desire to ensure rental tenure protected over the long term. In response, we agreed to register a covenant on title requiring the residential units to remain rental um in perpetuity. And with that commitment now incorporated into the bylaw, the rental tenure will be protected uh allowing the eastern portion of that property to return to its original RM7. Um, I'd also like to acknowledge the feedback we've received from mayor and council, whether directly or indirectly, uh, through, uh, previous discussions regarding the development permit. Um, so we do recognize the importance of continued community engagement and believe this project can still benefit from another developer hosted openhouse event um, hosted on site. Uh this would give our neighbors another opportunity to review the proposal to ask the questions uh to provide their feedback uh before the development permit returns to council. So uh for that reason we've

chosen to separate the two decisions. So tonight we're asking council to consider only the land use decision and adoption of bylaw number 2317. Uh the development permit will return to council separately after that additional round of community engagement has happened. Um I just wanted to uh say again thank you for the opportunities for these public information or sorry the uh public participation sessions. Um it has been uh fantastic to address you. I do know that uh with uh the election coming up I I do want to reiterate and say um thank you for everybody's time and consideration. Um, and I do look forward to returning uh with the development permit at a future meeting. So, thank you.

Thank you for coming forward. I'll call for a third time. If there's anyone uh wishing to come forward, please. You can certainly come forward, sir, and just uh and just be the next speaker after the gentleman coming forward. Point of order. Mayor, if we could extend the public participation period, if that's a motion to do so. Second. Second. Certainly. Yeah. Feel free to form a line just at the uh at the door. Not outside the door. Inside the door. Sorry. We have a a motion to extend public participation. Moved by councelor Gett and seconded by councelor Novik. Thank you. Any discussion? Seeing none. Those in favor?

Thank you. Opposed? None are opposed. That carries. Please go ahead. Sorry. Yep. Thank you, Mayor and Council. Good evening. My name is Rob Simon. I live in Sydney. I'm speaking tonight to urge council not to adopt the zoning bylaw to reszone 99723rd Street from R6R to R seven. Reszoning a property is a major decision that fundamentally changes what can be built in a neighborhood and requires full transparency. Throughout this application, public notice of the site has been severely compromised. On April the 30th, I wrote the town after observing the legally required notice of development sign was down, while the applicant's large corporate marketing sign remained prominently displayed. Town staff responded by stating back in April they had contacted the applicant directly and instructed them to reinstall the sign. However, at the July 13th meeting, council meeting, I spoke directly with the developer representative. Contrary to the town's written response, the representative stated that no one from the town staff had ever contacted them about the missing sign. Even more concerning, on July 14th, the day after I raised this

issue with before council, I personally witnessed town staff on site standing right in front of public notification sign while speaking to someone on the property, assuming it was an actual representative company. Yet, despite staff being there on the property, despite my emails, despite my presentation to council, the sign has never been re erected. It has not been up since. At this juncture, after multiple warnings and staff literally standing in front of the down sign on site, why is it legally require Why is it legally required public notice still missing? developers developers continuously continuous obligation under land use procedure bylaw 1380 to maintain clear signage until council makes final decision on zoning or resoning has not been met.

This is not a minor detail. Missing signage sends a false message to the neighborhood that reszoning has already been done or is a done deal, actively suppressing public engagement. As a result, nearby residents were deprived of a fair opportunity to understand the impact of jumping from R6R to R seven, including the increased intens um density and the threat to neighboring protected cherry and cypress trees. Council should not reward a process where basic notice requirements are neglected and where clear contradictions exist around enforcement. I respectfully ask council to vote against adopting the zoning bylaw amendment or at the minimum defer the zoning until proper notice is restored. The committee is given the transparent trans transparent process that is owed.

I want to sum it up. If the developer cannot be trusted to put up an 8-oot sign, how can it be trusted to put up a four-story building on that lot? Thank you. Thank you for coming forward. I'll turn to the next speaker. just a button at the bottom there and you can adjust the mic as you wish and your name. And my name is Lynn Cullen. I live um next door to what will be hopefully60 um White Birch. Um, I am in favor of of this development. It is far better than looking at an empty parking lot. You know, we live in a town city. Density is an expectation.

I mean, it's it's I if you want to go and live in our sanage with no sidewalks, no lights, go ahead. But we need to infill to provide u accommodation. I think this particular one is aimed at the high level um scale of of person. But I guess my my question right now sir is um are you intending on voting on this this evening? The matter the matter is on the agenda under item to be voted upon. uh uh there is a recommendation and uh council will deliberate on that and decide whether to make that recommendation or another recommendation. Well, and I guess I have a comment that you you must um listen to what that woman said about the department having expired and that a new one will need to be applied even even with a few changes.

Although I I did I do understand there are some zoning changes um which I have not I'm not familiar with. So my biggest thing is I would like to hear the presentation from um the developer person and [snorts] and then make my comments. Is is that allowed or am I using up my time now? Uh your time to speak this evening is is during public participation. Yeah, that's still public participation. Please continue. You have uh you have a total of four minutes and you're halfway through. Okay. Well, can I have two minutes after the presentation is made? No, [laughter] [gasps] I don't know why not. I mean, it's hard to make a it's hard to make any type of statement when I don't know what the new um I I see here.

Um, uh, rights of way that's nothing. Oh, the flood hazard covenant that you know that that's really important bearing in mind that report that was not available at the time the permit was grant well not granted but the development permit was applied for. Okay. So, it it's difficult for me to have a comment on that um or for even you to be able to um vote on something when you don't know what it is. Now, since I'm going to run out of time, uh the comment about the construction, well, um wake up. We we are in a a town that's developing. There will be construction workers coming and going for a limited amount of time.

Um they will need parking hopefully on site of the construction project. um the concerns from Harbor Landing about people cutting through. I I think you know a very simple solution to that is gate rest haven where it can be open paid for by the developer of course but where it can be open but for any fire emergency vehicles so that people do not cut through because it's a dead end and I I drove through there today and there's no parking and all kinds of signs that nobody can park in there without you know having a tow truck called and have their car hauled out of there. It's not a big deal. Um the the my last point I think yeah I think is about parking on white birch. Uh, you know, I'm a I'm a originally a Victoria person, so there are a huge number of streets that have residential parking signs on them. So that the side that the town houses themselves are on should be residential parking only.

decide that is now a big bush in front of my building where there is a 24-hour you can park for 24 hours should be open parking for anybody from my building uh the new building anybody I mean the people who I think are most at risk here are 20 55A because they had this big wide open lot with no fencing we in 2040 2050 50 can put a gate up and and get a fob and nobody gets in. Miss Colin, I would ask you to wrap up very quickly. Okay. Um, oh, just one thing because I have to take a shot in the dark here because I don't know what all these new things are is I um had a thought that because there is insufficient parking, you know, there's only enough for some of the residents, some of the marina.

I don't understand why in parking spots, Miss Miss Cullen, you have made points with regards to to parking for the new development. Miss Cullen, I want to be fair to all speakers this evening. I'm almost done. So, parking spots 29s to 40s. Put a second there. It's here. It will not disturb anybody's view. It will create 10 to 12 new parking spots for the development and hopefully help people um accept this easier than I know it'll cost a few hundred,000 but thank you charge for the parking. Thank you for coming forward. You're welcome. I will turn to the next speaker. Somebody Oh, somebody did it there.

Good evening. Good evening, mayor and council. My name is Noel Roberts and I uh live near uh the White Birch development and uh I' I've learned a few things tonight. Uh I've learned that uh we have a new development permit that's uh in in front of us for that development. And I guess my question related to that would then be uh if it is indeed a new development permit then when will there be an opportunity for wholesome public uh participation and input into that new development permit. Thank you for the question and the other points and the points raised by others. It is on the agenda this evening. staff will be speaking to it and then council will be deliberating and we when we hear questions from the public we seek to answer them when we are deliberating we're not deliberating the matter now we're listening to public input okay for so so so thank you for related to that then I would then ask

that there is a a process a clear public process that is established for people to understand what the new development permit looks like and and be um be have that opportunity to provide input based upon what the developer is now doing. Thank you for coming forward. Good evening. Good evening, council. I just wanted to make a couple your name, please. Oh, sorry. Uh Gwen Davyy, um Sydney. Um just a couple of quick points. One item on the agenda tonight was the removal of the American flag. There was a couple of um uh letters in favor of this. And I just wanted to say that um uh by the disrespect that we are getting from our neighbors to the south, I'm in favor of lowering the American flags. I know it's uh it's a hot button topic, but I just want to put my two cents in. The other thing I'd like to talk about is um the Bower Bank issue and um there was a post on Facebook and it got I can't quite

remember but I believe over 150 thumbs up and the vast majority of comments uh to the to the proposed change was positive. um not I would say at least 90 to 95% of the people want the changes and they want Bower Bank and Sidol to go back the way they were and they are prepared to entertain traffic calming devices such as speed bumps. Okay, thank you. Thank you for coming forward. I'm calling now for a last time. If there is any other speakers, please come forward. Just the microphone there, sir. Just the button for the microphone. There we go. My name is Vern Crawford. Um, your worship, members of council and staff. Um, thank you for your years of service on council. Really appreciate it. And thank each of our council members that have decided to let their name stand for re-election. Really appreciate that.

Um, so I live nearby here on Third Street and I'm here tonight to speak regarding the upcoming vote on the bylaw amendment that have have before us number 2275 uh for the pro proposed high street development. Um, however, and I'll make my comments very brief. Um, but they're kind of extend beyond this project alone. I want to address a broader concern regarding the current direction of the development here in Sydney. Um, in urban planning terminology, there's a there's a term called um or a concept, I guess, known as sense of enclosure. I'm sure many of you are familiar with that. Um, it's a critical metric um because it defines the exact spatial parameters that make community feel inviting.

And you know we have a very inviting community. It can also make it uninviting if it's done wrong. So that sense of enclosure when a streetscape becomes dominated by flatfaced box-like structures reaching 50 feet or maybe greater in the air. It creates an aggressive oppressive sense of enclosure and uh and takes away from your general feeling of of community. I asked council to picture what our town might look like in 10 years if we continue allowing developers to maximize every square meter of a lot for peak density. Who will want to visit our or walk through our town uh when our streets are cast in shadow by 50 foot high boxes with minimal setbacks?

There's nothing cozy or inviting about that. So, more specifically, um, the motion to amend zoning bylaw 2275. Council's original intent was to cap rental buildings at three stories high, I believe. And stand to be corrected if I'm wrong with that. But yet tonight, uh, you're being asked to approve a zoning designation that relies on sort of an artful caveat, should we say, essentially a workaround. As I stated, as stated in section one, subsection FV, I believe on the bylaw in front of you, uh it's designed to sort of jam rental more units onto the exact same footprint. So, elected officials, I urge you to think seriously about the long-term re repercussions of this decision, which will impact the car character of our community for decades. I ask that you uphold the original intent of the zoning bylaw and if these units are to be designated as rental only then the building height must adhere to that height limits that originally established for the rentals.

Thank you for your consideration. Thank you for coming forward. Not seeing other speakers, please come forward. uh your worship counselors. My name is Grant Foresight. I represent the strata right across the street from 2060 2055. We're not against the development, but we know the parking issues already exist. If you try to get out to White Birch Road and had to this council chamber, it's very very difficult to see to turn left. When the school is either bringing their kids in or picking them up at night, it's very difficult to get out. When you put a huge development like this in there, either we need a set of lights or a three-way stop sign.

You're going to have a lot of accidents there. You can't see bicycles when you're going around the corner. Everybody here that lives in that area, they would have to agree with that. that needs to be settled before you look at putting a huge development in. That's a really I think everybody here is looking at that the parking and trying to get out onto the roads. Thank you for your time. Thank you for coming forward. Please come forward. Good evening. Good evening. Is this a button push here? We're on, so you're good to go. No, you just turned it off. We're live. So, I skipped uh public speaking classes, but I am a realist. My name is Don Graham, and I'm a resident of 2040 White Birch.

Now, to begin with, I've lived there for 16 years, and I've seen some developments come and go along the way, but uh White Birch is basically a lane. It's not a real street. It's a lane. It's very narrow. It's kind of a cozy bedroom kind of community there. Very somewhat quiet. And uh my concern is the excess traffic that will impose with a bigger development like that. Now I'm not against developments but something on a more smaller scale that would be suitable to that that uh area we're talking about. So not opposed to any development but just a a smaller scaled down something that would be more re realistic and relevant to that area.

So, it's the biggest thing is the traffic and the density and the people that live there. And as a resident in that location, I would ponder if any one of you would like to have a house on that road and have that kind of density and high traffic on your street. So that's basically what I would like to just put it out there. So being a resident on that street and knowing how how the impact would be in that area and it is a lane. It's not a a very wide street and there's not a lot of parking and it's you know kind of I agree with the other people that live in that area with the same kind of feeling. So that's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Did you want to just perhaps turn the mic off? Please come forward. And if there are any additional speakers, if you could please uh line up just where the previous speakers were. Good evening, mayor and council. All I'd like to say tonight is just to thank you for your service for the last four years and some of you eight years even. It's uh not an easy job and you serve it with dignity and I really appreciate what you do for this town. It's been a pleasure to watch you over these last year or so and attend these meetings and I'm just sad to see you go. So, um I look forward to the next council and maybe we'll see some familiar faces and some new faces and um yeah, thank you.

Thank you for your remarks at this time. Not seeing any. Please come forward. If you could just turn the microphone on, please. Can you hear me now? Yes. Um, my name is Sarah Wington, and I've said multiple times about the project at 9972 Third Street that I don't support it for multiple reasons. Um, one, uh, the tenant protection policy that you had enacted wasn't fulfilled and I think the remedy to that should have been affordable units in that new development. I don't see any. Um, the other thing is somebody here mentioned tonight the sign has been down. And I think that's a really good indicator that if you can't do basic things like that, then why should you be doing favors for somebody and giving them the zoning that they want? So, there's that. And there's also the trees. And I said, sorry, I ran all the way here because I didn't know this was happening. So, I'm out of breath right now.

Please take your time. But the trees, the trees are ours. The trees belong to Sydney. They're beautiful. They're important. They should stay. And if they can't figure out, and they've been asked multiple times how to create a design that works around that, and I think they should be able to, um, then don't do them any favors. The development should work for us. It should work for the people that live here. It should work for the people who were displaced from that site. It should work for the neighbors who live around that property. It shouldn't just work for High Street. So, I ran all the way here to say that and I hope you say no to the reszoning. Thanks. Bye. Thank you.

Not seeing any further speakers, I will now close public participation. Thank you for everyone who took the time to come forward this evening and for those who are listening uh in the audience. So we are next turning to uh two items under 7D. Uh the first is a petition. I will turn to Mr. Scrivens uh presenting a petition with regards to Rothsay Avenue. Mr. Sciven I'd also like to thank you all for the service over the years. It's a tough job, a job I certainly wouldn't want to do. So, enjoy the change. Um, we are assuming that the mayor and council have read the letters that were submitted. Okay.

It's in the agenda package. I would also like to know if you've done a site inspection of the street. Okay. I see one chat. It's it's it's not we're not answering questions at this time, sir. Fair enough. Fair enough. Mayor and uh staff advised me that the signatures to the letter would receive a written response. This has not been the case. Several residents have not received the letter yet. I only have a copy of the letter because it was given to me by one of the neighbors. Okay. As the street letter to the town, the street letter to the town that was submitted stated that the work started 18 months ago. It is now 20 months since the work started. We're now faced with a minimum of two to three years build out on the current development that is going ahead on Roth Avenue, potentially longer if other things change.

We currently live on the most damaged and dangerous road in Sydney. Those of you that have walked it will realize that. Would the mayor and council want to live on our streets and endure the road system that we have and the construction parking that we're enduring? I don't think so. I actually spend a lot of time in my garage and front yard and I'm quite frankly tired of the walking public and tourists complaining to me about the state of the road. Many older people have stopped walking down the street now walking down the street to the ocean that is because of the road condition. We are the first street on third street with access to the water. We in theory are a tourist street and is projecting a bad image of Sydney.

The town has been aware of this development for approximately four years and should have started budgeting for a new road back then. In fact, before we purchased the house on Rothy Avenue eight years ago, the town advised me that they'd plan to build a new road in 2028, which is coming up very shortly. So you've had lots of time to budget for this. Two weeks ago, Fortis sent Capital Paving to do some repair work on Roth Avenue. Capital Paving actually declined to do the repair work because they said a new road is required, not a repair job. The town's response to us does not help our situation or address our current concerns regarding our simple requests.

A new road is what is needed. Your staff told us some weeks ago that we were getting a new road in August. Now in the staff letter that we received tells us it's a repair only and it has not been budgeted for. The boulevard on the north side of Rossy Avenue needs to be restored. The winter is coming and it will become another mud bath and cause mud splatter across the whole street, increasing the danger to the public using it. All construction parking should be confined to the new subdivision with no construction parking on Roth Avenue. The town does in fact have the authority to impose this. It has been done before in this m municipality and others and is currently being done in central sage.

And also you let the letter tells us to phone the bylaw offices if there's a problem. That's totally impractical. By the time you get a hold of the b officers, people have moved. Okay. In the meantime, we're restricted when construction is underway to basically a single row. Today when I tried to leave the house, I was boxed in by a stones slinging truck. I had to wait nearly 10 minutes to get away from my house. We need parking control on that street. You can easily impose temporary no construction parking on the street. I know you're in the hot seat, but we need the job to be done to service the public and the residents of Sydney.

Thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Scrivens. This is a presentation which is different from public participation. So you have asked a couple of questions. Um council members can ask you questions as well. Uh so I'll open it I'll first open it up to to council members if there are any questions either of Mr. Scrivens or of staff. Uh councelor Keefe please. Uh thank you. So just um through you through staff um just trying to I I have gone through there and just trying to get an an understanding of um what's happening there. So there's that the the new development that's been subdivided. Um, and I guess what I'm there seems to be um the uh Rossi itself is is is turned up uh you know pretty badly. And are we are we saying that we aren't able to complete the roadway until um the the different subdivided units are are developed? My am I understanding that correctly? that it would be pointless to go and do all the repaving because

somebody else is going to come in and subdivide another lot and there will be um additional turmoil there in terms of the roadway. I'll uh turn to staff. Um Mr. Hagen to begin please. Sure. Thank you. Good evening. Through the mayor to councelor O'Keefe. So the staff response that's on the agenda uh gives some information about how the road would be repaired. Um it does say following completion of roadbased repair, surface grinding and other pavement preparation work uh staff anticipate the paving work should proceed this fall. And I will defer to Mr. Murphy, director of engineering to speak more to that. But just in terms of your question about whether those road works have to wait until those newly subdivided lots are built out. No, they don't. The newly subdivided lots are on a bareland strata road which is not a town owned road. So that's a different matter. So I'll pass the mic to Mr. Murphy if he has anything to add.

Otherwise I will stop there. Mr. Murphy, do you have anything to add? Thank you. Keith, you have the floor. Okay. So I from what I understand from the staff response, we're anticipating that the road work will be completed this this fall. Okay. Sorry, if you can just push your microphone again. According to the letter we received, we were told it will be a repair job only as you have no money in the budget to do a proper new road on the street and it'll be some years down the road before the street is properly rebuilt, resurfaced. Mr. describ in in in respect uh to to your letter. So as I indicated your letter in the staff reply is in the agenda package u that was published last Thursday. The first of the three items uh in your letter I mean there is a preamble um and then there are three specific points. The the first point is repairing the road. It was an inferior paving job

to start with and now is down to a fragmented single lane and hazardous to pedestrians. There is not a particular request with regards to the road yet this evening in your presentation. We're hearing for the I'm hearing for the first time. I believe council's hearing for the first time that you have a request for a new road. You're making references to a new road in previous plans. I'm not sure that's something that we can address this evening. Okay. The new road came from your staff. We were advised that a new road was going to be put in in August. That's where the new road comes from.

Okay. So, um again, this is uh we're on the fly. We're not going to ask staff to to to speak to a new road. It's it's not part of your letter in terms of the request. It is tonight and it's not part of the staff response. The staff response was clarifying that there would be repairs uh to the road done. So, uh council may make a motion after we conclude this discussion to to staff to reply with regards to a request for a new road, but it's not something that we can Okay. comment further on this. I'll turn it. Councelor Keef, I'm sorry, you had the floor.

Yeah. No, I I I believe um Mr. Murphy was going to respond to uh some comments that had been made in regards to the road. Mr. Murphy. So staff responses as per the attached letter which indicates that repairs will be completed in the fall. There is no budget. There is no plan for a curb to curb full road rebuild. Uh so not only there's not there's no budget but additionally with future construction coming on the road, it's not advised to do a full road rebuild and repave. uh with heavy construction traffic still to come as that would damage the the repair job. So, it's not that it can't be done, it's just that it would u be wasted money to some degree.

Thank you, Mr. May. Please continue, counselor. Uh thank you. So, um I've I've I've gone down that road before. I don't I don't recall that there was curbs on that road in in the past or or currently. So be pardon. It's just an expression curve to curve. Oh, okay. Sorry. [laughter] So, so but my understanding is that the what what you're doing is you're returning the road to how it had previously been um that residents were were used to. Um, and then maybe in the future we might up upgrade it after the the additional uh subdivision is complete. But what the the repairs or what will be done this fall will return it to what residents were accustomed to in the past is Yes, the repairs would certainly return it to a perfectly usable state. would repair any uh trenches that were dug for water manes etc and other utilities and uh however it would be a patchwork of old pavement and new pavement but uh sections that are uh significantly damaged would be rebuilt and repaved.

Right. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. Sorry councelor please. Thank you mayor through you to staff. Um just out of curiosity is for 2525 or say have the required French improvements been completed for that project. Uh I'm sorry I don't know specifically but I'm told the sidewalk is in so at least a portion. Oh the sidewalk I think the sidewalk is for the new subdivision. I don't think there's a sidewalk in front of 2525 or I'll say but yeah. Okay. Um u to me having gone down there the the section in front of the 25 25 raw state is by far and away the worst section uh easily. It's uh it's yeah I can see why people are concerned. It would definitely be a hazard for somebody who had mobility issues to fall. So I'm I'm glad to hear that we're going to do something. Now is that is that something that the town has to bear responsibility for or is that something the developer would be contributing to fixing?

Uh so I'm not familiar with the development agreement or what was included in off-site works. Uh so with the the water main extension for sure then uh paving would be included in those costs. So I my assumption is the majority are developer paid. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you mayor. Thank you. So my my question through to staff just furthering the discussion is that after the um further significant construction staff will consider at that time whether what uh what what further repairs or changes to the roadway uh would occur. That would be the normal process. But as with anything, if council wishes to to bring it forward or include it in budget discussions for next year or the following year, uh certainly that's at council's prerogative. Um the normal process would normal, you know, staff process would be to wait for heavy construction to be completed and then bring forward the budget item.

So wait for construction to be completed, assess, and then as necessary bring forward budgeting. Mr. Scrivens, does that uh does that satisfy your your questions? Not really, but I'll have to accept it. We do have a second speaker on this topic tonight though. Uh sorry, your part of the presentation. If somebody is joining you in the presentation, we should have that. No, there was two speakers allocated for tonight. Um, sorry, I'm only seeing one speaker. Miss Nelson, can you clarify? He did advise that he was bringing another speaker, but I didn't I didn't think it was um two separate opportunities for a presentation. It was one presentation and you could bring who you'd like to speak with you. If the gentle if the person who's accompanying you this evening has new information, we would welcome that person to come forward at this time.

Nope. I guess would duplicate it. Thank you, Mayor Council. Thank you, Council. We have received this correspondence as as we indicated also with the staff reply. There is a recommendation. I'll move that we receive this for information. Second move and seconded. Any discussion? I'm not seeing any discussion. I'll call a question. Those in favor? Uh that carries unanimous. Thank you. The second item under presentations this evening is under 7.2 two and it is a development permit application number DP1000863 at 2020 2060 White Birch Road to allow for the construction of a four-story 61 unit multi-unit residential development with surface and underground parking. We have a presentation from Mr. Wagner Lopez from Brenton Construction Group.

Um the presenter will have up to 10 minutes uh to speak or presenters and then uh we will open it to questions from council uh to either the applicant or to staff. Uh we will then after that process we will then uh be discussing the matter as an agenda item later on. So just to confirm, Mr. Lynhome, you you and your contingent are aware that you you have 10 minutes for your presentation and we can have questions and following that. Certainly. Well, I I I can promise you that it'll only take 10 minutes because this is essentially the same application that you approved uh just over two years ago. The same council, same owners, same location, same building. with only the slightest variation that I've already told you about with the location of certain services room. So, my name is Mark Lindholm. I'm one of the principal owners of Marina Park Marina. This is Mr. Brent Olston. He's another principal owner of Marina Park Marina. And this is

Wagner Lopez, our project manager from Brenton Construction, uh who will be the builder of the building. Brenton Construction is owned by Alustin Properties, which is one of the co-owners. So, this is a tight integrated group. Okay. So, Mr. uh Lopez will sorry, Mr. Lopez will take you through our very brief slide presentation because it's essentially the same building and then I I'll make a few comments afterwards as may Brent in terms of some of the issues that have been raised by some of the other speakers. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. Good evening, Mayor, councelor, staff and everyone from White. Uh the Thailanding is the same project. If you could just speak closer to the mic, you can certainly adjust it, but we are recording and we do have participants online.

Oh, okay. Sorry for that. Uh, we are presenting the Thailanding is a 61 unit building. That's the same building we apply uh two years ago in the whiteboard. Uh we will have 31 one-bedroom apartments, 23 two-bedroom apartments, and seven three-bedroom apartments. Uh this will be this will make the community better and I heard I hear all you guys during this presentation asking about the parking and all the the space. We have parking for all the units and all the tenants including the marina ones. So through the entire process uh we change our we change our our sorry we change our utilities for the ground level do the storm water and sorry I'm not I'm not familiar with microphones so [laughter] and we still retain the marina uh one I think for the building right now we are waiting for the building permit but the airspace parcel we already got.

Unfortunately um it's a brand new process for us for all the staff and was a three months process and turns out in 19 months for we get this approved with a back and forths and waiting for the city. But we understand it's a very brand new process. So uh this take time and the only thing outstanding for us right now is the fees. We got the airspace. We did um the registration with the BC housing for 10 years uh rental. So all the requirements are done in this moment. But unfortunately our development permit expired on the 18th and after that we got all the documentations till today and just are the only thing extended is the payments for the fees and the new development permit. We ask for the staff to extending that for one month. That what the only thing we need. But unfortunately, we cannot extend the development permit. So we are reapplying for the same project with the same owners with the same quantities uh to get this approved. And

that's the we respectfully asking for you guys uh to consider that and thank you very much for your time. Thank you very much. I hear you guys. I I understand we we'll work. If you can just speak Sorry. Thank you. Uh I just wanted to be respectful with everyone here and understand the the staff. It's it's it's working hard as well and and to helping everyone and we are making sure we are not only doing for the town of Sydney but for the community not for only the the building code but we we want to do that for the community itself. We'll be more residential will be a beautiful place to live and the city is growing and we need a a better place. So that will be good for everyone. Thank you. Thank you.

So just to uh to wind up, I want to remind you that your consideration here is limited. This is not a reasonzoning. This is a issuance of a development permit. And the development permit uh limits you to what you can consider. And we're talking about the forming of the building, not parking on White Birch Road or at Turn Signal at uh McDonald Park Drive. These may be issues in the future, but those were all litigated and mooted in detail during the resoning process. So, we're not going to redo that. The building has not changed from the permit that was issued two years ago. We're only asking what is effectively an extension. We're ready to go. As uh Mr. Mr. Lopez pointed out, we're ready to go with the building permit. The building permit process is already complete. The only thing that's being um holding us up now today is one, you approving once again the development permit and two, sorry, that is it. When the development permit um if a new development permit is issued tonight,

then the building permit can issue. The only thing holding up a building permit is us paying the fees. will pay the fees upon the approval of the development permit. So, we're ready to rock. We're we're ready to go. So, I can't I can't say much more than that. The parking on White Birch Road is not an issue. Thank you for your uh presentation this even if we can ask the if [music] we can ask the gallery to be respectful and quiet while we were conducting our meeting. Thank you. I'll now turn to members of council if they have any questions of the proponent or staff.

Um, and a reminder that while sorry, the questions at this point are for uh the proponent. This does come up as an agenda item under nine 9B. Uh, councelor Gett to begin and councelor O'Keefe and councelor Mul. Thank you, mayor. uh through whoever would like to answer the question. So um please if you could explain the air parcel because I I'm familiar with air parcel spaces but not in a rental apartment building. So I'm I understand this took a long time. So perhaps you could squeeze it down a little bit for me to understand. But what what what is the what is it and what was it about it that took so long to get to that point?

Well, actually that's a question for your staff. Um and not just I'm not trying to lay blame. and just that as we understand it, they're very busy. It's a whole new process for Sydney. Uh it's also a new process for us. Wasn't a new process for our solicitor, but it's a new process. The purpose for the air space parcel, by the way, was in order to have the the um the project comply with your setback requirements. We didn't want it, but but it was that was part of it. The other part of it was this building will not be built without CHC financing. That's just a reality. CHC said, "We have no interest in financing a project that has a marina attached to it. It can only be a rental residential building that complies with our really limited scope of what we will um finance. So, we had to separate the residential component from the marina component. In order to do that and comply with your bylaws for setbacks, we had to create this airspace parcel. And that is an undertaking, I

can tell you. And uh and so without sorry, Miss Rhage uh assistance, we got through the process, but it was a long and arduous one. We do have a timeline that we can tell you. We started it on March 19, 2024. That's when the application to Sydney went for our airspace parcel and it was finally concluded on September the 14th, 2026. Okay. And we had periods there where we were we were waiting for the town of Sydney to give responses to issues that had they had raised and we had responded to and so forth. But and it took that long. We were willing participants in the process. Sydney was doing their best with the limited resources available, waiting on council on both sides and so on so forth.

Now that's what it so that's why it took that long. It wasn't it wasn't because we were delaying and I'm sure it wasn't because anybody in Sydney wanted to delay, but it was it just was the reality of how long that took. You may want to consider in future whether an airspace personal application should be uh restricted to a two-year DP or three-year one because it it takes a while. Thank you. I I just I get it now, but when I when I'm reading this, I'm like, what do they mean by an airspace parcel? Okay, perfect. And if I understand correctly that in the package you sent us, it's saying is complete apart from a BC housing exception. Now, is that resolved?

That's been resolved. We've now submitted that as well. That was I think on Friday. So, okay, those that's all I have for now. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, councelor Ganette. Councelor O'Keefe, please. Uh [clears throat] uh thank you and thank you for the refresher on the project. Um I'm I'm just curious about the CHC financing. So presumably they've they've given you that or providing that in exchange for and is is that for the the rental units? So that no or what what component of it? What's the condition? What is CHHC uh requiring you to provide in order for that finance? Well, they're not they're not requiring us to provide anything other than mortgage security, but what what the CHCA mortgage financing is for is for the cost of construction of the residential rental building and it has to be a residential rental building in order to get the appropriate financing.

Yes, that that's that's what I was ask asking. And so and they've so they're providing that and so the financing is that's and by the way we we've got that commitment from CHC. Yeah. And so did you say that's it's just for 10 years though. So they have to be maintained as kept as rental units. Yes. For 10 years. For 10 years and then after that you can That's right. And that was part of the reasoning um discussion. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. That's all. Um, I have questions for staff, but we're not there yet. Okay, councelor, please. Thank you, Mayor. Um, my question was along the lines of councelor Garnett, which you've, I believe, addressed. I just wanted to clarify, though. Uh, have you, uh, registered this this parcel as a as a strata? No. So, it's not a strata.

Uh, the this may be for for staff, but you may know then. So the the airspace parcel itself is not attached to the building. It's a separate parcel is it registered with Yes. Effectively it's a it's like it's like a it's like an aerial subdivision. So it's a the airspace parcel is basically a box in space. It's a box in air and the building is built within that box. You follow me? I Yeah. But I'm I guess I just scratched my head thinking why is all this new if this is not the first building over three stories in the town of Sydney. So Well, it's got nothing to do with the three stories. It's the save that for the staff.

Yeah. It's got nothing to do with the height. It's actually got to do with the with the u horizontal plane the the setbacks the setbacks to the property lines. Yeah. Okay. So not a strata. This had to this process had to be completed in part because of the CMHC financing and separating the marina from the residential. Absolutely. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Um councelor Novik for first time. Uh thank you, mayor, and thank you for your presentation. Yes, sir. Um the parking area that's surface parking. Uh you have 33 spots designated for marina parking. Yep. Uh is any of that parking accessible to residents of the apartment building in any way or is it gated or how are you keeping those parking spaces?

Well, for one thing, we're going to continue to own the building. So, we will regulate our own parking on our own property. Uh so, that's the first thing. Second thing is is that as a consequence of the airspace parcel subdivision, the portion of the land which is the remainder um is where the parking for the marina is. So the marina is the remainder property and the airspace parcel is the residential property and a portion of the horizontal plane is designated for the parking for the residential property and the rest is in the remainder which is the marina property. Does that make sense? Okay. I So there's there's not a physical barrier. There's no need for a physical barrier. I'm I'm just wondering if you know marina marina attendants come and go. They're there at certain hours of the day, not at other hours of the day.

There's turnover, etc., etc. I'm just wondering if any of those marina spaces would be available to tenants of the [snorts] apartment building. Oh, entire entirely possible. I mean, that's an internal management issue, right? We have apartments and if we have empty spaces in the marina, if we can rent them or they they're as long as as long as there's a single owner, it's no problem at all. That that's what I'm getting at because it seems that one of the big concerns of residents in the area is a deficit of parking. Uh and there's concerns as well that uh even though the building meets the town requirement of one parking space per unit, very often families that move in have more than one vehicle and then it it requires that second vehicle. Of of course there may be families with no vehicles and so there may be some some breakage in that.

Um, do you have a further question, councelor Nova? Yeah. Uh, so, uh, my my question was whether or not tenants would have the ability to rent any of that surface parking space either permanently or temporarily or in some way. So, the answer to that is if there's excess parking for the marina, then yes, absolutely. We'll utilize it. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Um, seeing no other first-time speakers, I'll have a couple of questions. Um and the first is that um the indications are from the presentation and from the information in the in the council package is that there is no discernable and when I use the term no discernable that is to u people living uh in adjoining properties or to a cisual observer who might come to the neighborhood. There is no discernable differences in this d in this development from the application that has been in process for building permit over the past year year and more.

Yeah. And and your worship if I even expand on that it won't be discernible to you or to anybody else because there's no change to the exterior of the building. The exterior hasn't changed. The only change was the movement of services room from the lower floor to the upper floor. Thank you for clarifying that. uh speakers uh this evening made reference to uh flood control level and changes that might have occurred since the uh uh council provided the uh development permit. Uh can you can you speak to where those flood control level changes or issues uh dealt with in the application that is under consideration by the town at this time? Well, that's exactly why that room is moved from the grads level up to the first the first actual built level from you follow me.

That's because that's because we were complying with the new um township's bylaw with respect to the height of um of the geodetic height above sea level. Okay. Thank you. And um just for further clarification, we appreciate the the information that this application process has gone longer than anticipated because of a requirement that you have uh to separate uh the marina uh property from uh the rental property. Correct. My question is is is the parking for the rental part property while you're meeting the parking requirement is that still part of the rental property or let's again it is. It's part of the airspace parcel. Yeah. Oh, it's part of the airspace parcel.

Okay. Thank you. I have no further questions. Uh I'm not seeing colleagues with any further questions. Thank you for your presentation and taking our questions. Thank you. Okay. As I've indicated a couple of times, we will come back to this item under 9A. We do have some business in between that. Uh we're just completing presentations. Uh we do have uh four bylaws to now consider under item 8. The first under item 8A is bylaw number 2317, zoning amendment number five at 99723rd Street to reszone the eastern portion of the property from RM6 to RM7 to allow the development of a four-story multi-unit residential building containing a total of 75 apartment dwellings. As the applicant who spoke during public participation indicated this evening, uh there are different uh parts to this uh process. Uh there was the resoning uh there is the resoning application which is on our agenda this evening. Uh there is also a development permit application and a development variance permit application. Council is not considering that those two

applications at this meeting this evening. That will come forward uh to a future meeting if the resoning application for consideration if this resoning uh amendment uh moves forward. Um and so approving the zoning amendment does not approve the development and does not approve the development variance that comes back for further consideration. I just wanted to make those comments with regards to process. I also want to acknowledge that we have had substantial correspondence as listed on the agenda and is is included. So while these these correspondents came to council at previous meetings while considering the application, it has been moved forward to this uh to this meeting. uh because it is relevant.

Uh so I've done the introduction. I would turn to uh colleagues if there are any questions or we have a recommendation to consider. I'll turn first to councelor Gett and then to councelor O'Keefe. Thank you mayor. Uh three to staff. Um looking at um land use procedures bylaw number 1380 and looking under u number three which this applies to amendment to zoning bylaw uh 3.5 the notice of and somebody spoke to it at participation notice of development application sign and the need to install one. Uh and there's a few preamles on what it has to look like furniture of the property those kind of things. Uh 33 35E speaks to legible from the street. So, it's required that the sign is not only legible, but visible.

Is that correct, Men? Uh, yes. Through the mayor. That's right. The sign must remain installed on the site and be visible from the street. The intent of that regulation is to make sure people don't have to trespass onto private property to read the sign and to see what the development application is about. Great. Thank you. And if I may, mayor, 3.7, um the notice of development application sign shall remain installed on the subject property for the duration of the amendment prop application process. Um so that means from the entire time so like until the point where the zoning by if it's adopted is adopted then it can come down. Yes, that's correct.

And that's a requirement not a recommendation. It is a bylaw requirement. Yes. Thank you. Thank you mayor. If I sorry if I could speak to that just a speaker earlier during public participation made comments that they heard from high street that that they hadn't been informed by the town that the sign that the sign needed to stay installed. So we do have communication from town staff to the applicant um from May from July from August asking them to install the sign. We did have confirmation twice that the sign had been reinstalled but it seemed to come down quite quickly after it had been installed and so they went to reinstall it, sent a photo of it being reinstalled and then it was down again.

So they have made attempts to install the sign and it has repeatedly come down. So again they reinstalled it early September, sent a photo that it was installed and again it is down. So just wanted to inform council of that. Thank you. Thank you Miss Verhigen for that information. We appreciate it. Um I have a question following councelor Ganette's sorry I should wait in the speaking order. I'll turn to councelor O'Keefe next please. Uh thank you mayor. Just a a quick question. Um during public participation concern was uh there was concern expressed about you know four fourstory building on that that plot. Um my understanding just wanting to confirm that the OCP does provide for up to four stories on that on that lot. So this uh there was no OCP amendment. This was something that is permitted on that property.

Yes, that's correct. Okay. Yep. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor O'Keefe. I see no other speakers. My question following councelor Gettes is uh given the sign has not been maintained um observable to uh to to the public are there any uh implication or implications for not meeting that requirement? Um thank you mayor. Uh it's a good question. Technically um there may be implications for a project that was moving quickly through its approval process. However, I think given the long duration that this project has been uh going through the uh uh various approval stages, um I I think it would be hardressed for especially the immediate neighbors to not be aware of the development that is occurring. And I myself have seen the sign uh in its uh proper form uh periodically and Miss Vagan is correct that uh it does seem to be taken down rather quickly. We are no idea as to how or why that happens. So um I would recommend that the sign um periodically being down uh not be an issue of concern for council.

Thank you, Mr. Edwards. Not seeing any further discussion uh by members of council. Uh we do have a recommendation. Councelor Renzel, I'll move adoption. Second. Second. Sorry, I did mean to. We have it moved and seconded. I'll turn to movers in just a moment. I did want to speak back to process. I was indicating that there was three applications and we're considering one of those three applications this evening. Uh this has been in process and come to council at previous meetings. Uh we gave first and sec first, second and third reading at a previous meeting and the requirement is is that it be forwarded uh to the ministry of transportation for approval and so we've been waiting for that and ministry approval was received by the town on September 10th. Hence we can bring this forward to our agenda this evening to consider adoption. We have the motion to adopt on the floor. I'll turn to the movers.

Yeah, thank you, mayor. Um I I'm certainly concerned that the the signage uh uh wasn't kept up to the duration of this process. Um but I am hearing from staff that uh it's not through effort on the part of developer to ensure that it is posted and then it's being removed. I concur with the assessment given the time that this has been under consideration uh that uh those in the community who were interested in providing comment with respect to the uh the zoning bylaw amendment uh have had opportunity and and have responded I think uh fulsomely. Uh as the mayor has noted this is not a building permit being issued. This is aligning the two properties under the same component of the zoning bylaw. This is enabling um uh through this amendment that this building uh in in course uh when it's approved and when it's constructed will be rental tenure in perpetuity and I think that's something that uh this council was uh was

comfortable with was seeing that element included uh in the project. Thank you mayor. Thank you. Turn to the second. Uh thank you mayor. I I don't really have anything to add. Uh I think um staff explanation of the appearance and disappearance and reappearance of the sign does not suggest that there's any bad faith on part of the developer or the town. Uh that that it was either person or persons unknown that were responsible for the uh the removal of the sign and the developer replaced it uh seemingly in as soon as they were notified. Uh so from from that perspective and and based on what my colleague has said, I I don't see any reason to um hold back on this. Thank you.

Thank you, Councelor Novik. I'll turn to colleagues. Councelor Ganette. Thank you, Mayor. Um I previously did not I voted against in the previous three uh second and third reading. Um at at the time I did support the rental in perpetuity that was moved by councelor O'Keefe because I think that's if it's going to be in there, if this is going to move forward, I think it's important. I I do have I do wish we had asked for more. We lost 20 below market nearmarket rentals in the two buildings that were there and there's none being replaced. So those um although there is market rental and that's great. We need that.

We have approved a lot of market rentals and what we really need in this community is below market rental and that's what every one of our housing assessment studies shows and there's a lack of that here. So, I would have liked to have seen at least the entertainment of an idea of permissive tax exemption similar to Aranza the Aranza building or something in terms of maybe bypassing the amenity contributions for something that we could get that's tangible that's really a benefit to our community given what we've lost there. Um, but as far as the and I appreciate staff's comments about the sign, what's troubling to me is that there the 2180 the sign's still there.

It's never gone away. I walk by it once every week. Um, this as noted by the speaker, they sent a picture in the package. That's what sort of brought my attention to it that the sign had fallen over, I guess, in a windstorm perhaps. Uh, and then of course at the July 13th meeting, I as a representative was in the building, I mentioned that the sign was not was down. So, I've subsequently gone out there every single week since. And it's never been up and I go at different times of the week and it's down in the same spot. So, if it's been moved back up, how does it always fall to the exact same spot? I think that's hard. It's hard to explain to me that that could happen. In particular, when the high street sign has never fallen down, it's been up the whole time. So, appreciating if they say they did it and there's pictures, they put it back up.

What would you not try a different way of doing it? Would you not put the like to now today it's up. I was there Saturday. It wasn't up. It's there today for the first time. I've seen it in weeks, months actually. And it's attached to the fencing. That could have been done from the start and that sign would have not been it would have been visible for everybody. And it's fine to say that it's been a long process. The neighbors should know. The whole community is allowed to weigh in on this, not just the neighborhood. And many people in our community are gone for extended periods of time. So, they may not be I I mean, it's been out there. So, I'm sure a lot of people are aware, but there is a possibility.

There's people in our community who are snowbirds or come and go are not going to be aware of it. And so, I, you know, you're providing an opportunity for everybody to comment on that. And the process states for the duration. Whether or not you've tried to put it back up doesn't say you must try to put it back up. It says for the duration. So, it should be posted every single day through the process from my perspective. So, that's a problem for me and and that's another reason why I will not support this. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, councelor Agnet. Council, we do have the opportunity. We don't use it uh often, but it is certainly a reasonable process. Uh this is a question mark in apparently many people's minds, uh members of council and and no doubt the public. Uh we could uh pass a motion to invite uh the proponent uh into the meeting uh to answer the question uh with regards to the management of the sign. I'll leave

it to council if they wish to uh to proceed with that. I'm not seeing any members uh wishing to do that. So, is there any further deliberation? Councelor O'Keefe. Uh thank you. Um issu issues with the sign. Uh a bit of a bit of a concern. Um but more for me has always been as councelor Garnett says is um in exchange for this reasonzoning when we do these things what what are we getting uh that's going to benefit the community and so based on what I saw here um you know I'm happy that there's going to be rentals in perpetuity that would have been great but that's you know that that's that's a need that what we need are uh more below market rentals. So, I would have been more inclined to to support a reszoning. Uh we're we're providing additional density at at four stories. Um so, I I just don't think that we're getting a significant enough of a benefit uh for the community

um in in my view. Uh so I won't uh support the um the amendment. Thank you. Thank you uh councelor O'Keefe. I I do want to remind colleagues that we're considering the zoning application, the development permit and the variance permit will come forward. Uh motivations that are made to this evening may be pertinent to the zoning application, but they could also be considered pertinent to the development permit application or variance application. Seeing no further discussion, I'll look to call the question. Those in favor? Opposed? Councelor Gernett and Councelor Kefir opposed and councelor Duck. The motion carries. Thank you. We're next turning to item 8B. Uh item 8B is bylaw number 2303, development cost charge and amenity cost charge waiverss and reductions to wave and reduce development cost charges. We'll just pause for a moment while some leave the chamber.

Thank you. Item 8B is bylaw number 2303, development cost charge and amenity cost charge waiverss and reductions to wave or reduce development cost charges and amenity cost charges for eligible development. Uh just a note on process council has approved uh the new uh development cost charge under a separate bylaw and the amenity cost charge bylaw under separate bylaw. This is a separate bylaw with regards to the waiverss to those two other bylaws. Uh we have considered it at a previous meeting provided uh given three readings to it and we have a cons a recommendation. Councelor Gette I move that the bylaw be adopted. Second and seconded by councelor duck. Alternative movers.

Councelor Duck. Uh, I can't add anything to this other than we've had discussion in the past and I think we've done our due diligence on this to make sure that the developments that come forward that are deserving of waiverss are uh covered by this uh bylaw. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, not seeing any discussion, I'll call the question. All in favor? Uh, that carries unanimous. Thank you. We're turning into item 8 C, which is by line number 2320, permissive tax exemption for Rest Haven Lodge at 2281 Mills Road to exempt the property from taxation for eight years from 2027 to 2034. This has been considered at a prior meeting and three readings have been given. We have a recommendation.

Councelor Gette, I'll move that the bylaw be adopted. Second. Moved and seconded by Councelor Duck. Any discussion, motivation? Not seeing any. I'll call the question. Those in favor that carries unanimous. Thank you. And under 8D, we have bylaw number 2322, short-term capital borrowing to approve short-term borrowing for making capital improvements to the Tista boat launch facility. I'll turn to Mr. Hick, our director of finance, to introduce his report, please. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The purpose is uh to adopt a short-term capital borrowing bylaw to fund the town share of improvements at the Toista boat launch should alternative funding not be secured. As you'll recall, this relates to both a recent grant application and an engineering study on the facility that we did in preparation for a budgeted maintenance of the boat launch.

The um bylaw was written and is being advanced for a higher amount than we would need if the um grant application was successful, but it's done in this manner just to um give us the funding should we not get the grant and we are unable to find alternative funding for the project prior to initiation. It's important to note, as I've pointed out before, that the adoption of this bylaw does not bind us to borrowing the funds. Adoption of this bylaw is simply a backs stop in case the project needs to go ahead without those alternative funding sources that I mentioned previously. And uh staff will be looking to rep prioritize certain park improvements to try and find alternative funding for the boat launch. and this may be considered as part of the um upcoming financial plan.

Under legislation, the town is allowed to to um hold up to 150 per capita in short-term borrowing, which must be for a term of five years or less. And uh that works out to just under $2 million. We currently do not have any short-term borrowing. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hisolder. Colleagues, if there are any questions, not seeing any questions, we can proceed by giving uh separate resolutions to first, second, and third reading. Councelor Gette, I'll move that the bylaw be given first reading. Second. Moved and seconded. All in favor. Thank you. None are opposed. That carries. I'll move that the bylaw be given second reading. Second. Moved and seconded by councelor Novik.

This is the reading where we have any discussion. I'll turn to the movers. Not seeing any discussion from the movers or others. So I'll call a question. Those in favor? Thank you. Opposed? None are opposed. That carries. I move the bylaw be given third reading. Second. Move and seconded. All in favor. That carries unanimous. This will come forward to a future meeting for consideration of adoption. Thank you. Returning out now to to nine development permits and development variance permits. Uh under 9A we have development variance permit application number DV 10000395 at 10007 Cit Road to reduce rear interior side and exterior side setbacks to allow a new dwelling in the rear yard. Uh we have had this presented uh by the proponent at a previous meeting and held discussion. Uh we gave direction for uh notice to go to a radius of uh neighboring properties. We have had no written submissions received as of uh this evening and we have a recommendation.

My apologies. I did say so during agenda approval of the agenda. We do have uh an item that was received just uh today for tonight's meeting under this item. I'll turn to colleagues. I'll move the application be approved. Second. Moved and seconded. I'll turn to the movers. Not seeing any discussion from the movers or others. I'll call the question those in favor. That carries unanimous. Thank you. So we are now turning to item 9B uh development permit number DP1000863 at 2060 White Birch Road to allow for the construction of a four-story 61 unit multi-unit residential development with surface and underground parking. And I'll turn to Mr. Verhagen, please. is our director of development services for an introduction.

Thank you. Um, as you've indicated, this is an application for a development permit for this project. Uh, to clarify some comments that were made earlier, this is a new development permit application that meets our town requirements for a devel major development permit application. Um, as it says in the report, we do not have a process for extending an expired development permit. The process is to submit a new application, which has been done here. Uh it is essentially the same project that was approved in June sorry January 2024. Um and the changes to the project are outlined in the staff report. Almost all of them were approved through a development permit minor process that is outlined in the report. There's quite detailed bullets for what changes were made through that development permit minor process that was approved at a staff level earlier this year.

Um many of the changes were resulting from building code requirements as the architect went through the exercise of ensuring that the form and character from the development permit meets building code requirements in response to site constraints as they indicated for utilities for parking responding to um comments from engineers on the flood construction level, recommendations for protecting systems within the building from potential flooding. Those modifications have been made. Um the has asked for an expedited approval of this process of the development permit major. I mean as staff recalls normally a DP major will come through committee of the whole council then be referred on to the advisory planning commission for a review against the the design guidelines for this form and character development permit area. APC's recommendation will come back to council and then council would consider approval or not. Um, in this case, no design guidelines have changed since the application was approved previously. Staff did the internal review at a DP minor level for the the slight external modifications that were made as the building permit

application review was underway, which is why we are supportive of their request for that expedited review by council and consideration of approval at this point. Um, I'd like to speak to some points about the airspace parcel subdivision as well that were raised earlier. Let me just open those up here. So, as was explained, the airspace parcel subdivision is to essentially divide a three-dimensional space from the ground below it. You see them done in all all over Canada. It's a legal process defined by the legislation for BC and for other provinces as well. Um, in this case, we understood it was requested by the applicant to separate the residential building from the commercial marina site as they indicated for their financing. There's nothing in the zoning bylaw setback requirements that require an airspace parcel subdivision to be done. So, I'd have to speak with the applicant to find out what that understanding is coming from.

It's not a zoning by requirement to have an airspace parcel subdivision here. It did take quite some time to sort through the necessary agreements, easements, and covenants that are required because, as you can imagine, the services are coming through the rem the the land part that's under the airspace parcel is called the remainder parcel for a subdivision. So there's a lot of legal agreements that have to be done to allow services and utilities and people and cars to cross the remainder parcel to access the airspace parcel. There are some parking spaces for the apartment building that are on the remainder parcel being the marina parking lot and all the details about those parking spaces had to be worked through and included in the legal documents. So that did take quite some time to work through with the applicant, but as they indicated, that is all done.

It's registered on title. The the land has been divided into this airspace parcel, threedimensional box within which the building will be built if it's approved by council. And the the land, the remainder parcel, that will be the marina parking lot and the marina office building. Um, I think that was everything about the airspace parcel. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Vagen. any colleagues and I'll begin with councelor O'Keefe. Uh thank you through you to staff. Um I think we we've covered some of this stuff but because there was a number of these things that came up in the letters and in public participation. I just wanted to get get some clarity for myself and maybe for members of the public. Um so there was comments made about that we were in contravention of the local government act because we were ex extending this and my understanding from what's in the report and from your comments now now is that we're we're not in contravention of the local government

act uh staff indeed did um ask the applicant to submit a whole new permit or application and that included new new drawings um all all new whatever would be required is through the mayor. Yes, that's correct. Um as it says page three of the staff report, our bylaws don't contain a mechanism to extend approval of a DP. And on the first page of the staff report talks about the local government act legislation and says the permit will lapse. So yeah, that speaker was correct. The permit has lapsed which is why they've submitted a new development permit application. Um, also the speed the applicant indicated that they're very close to getting a building permit and that is correct. The building permit is very close to being issued. Right.

If the development permit is approved, then that would proceed. Thank you. Thank you. And then just uh confirming just because it came up in public participation again in in many of the letters about the new flood construction level guidelines. And so um what I heard just to confirm is that um those those new guidelines were considered and that the um applicant was uh required to submit a new engineer's report and staff reviewed that there will be a covenant on the title as you mentioned in in the staff report. So there's should be no issue with that. Yes, that's correct. That's our standard process in Sydney for developments that are on land. When this application was made that are below 5 meters above sea level where there's plans for habitation or buildings proposed for people to live in, uh they submitted a flood hazard report prepared by a professional engineer that contained recommendations for how to minimize the hazard in the development. Um the applicant is following those. So our staff has been

working with the applicant and their engineers and architects to make sure that they are meeting those requirements. Right. Thank you. and and then just um there's been a lot about um mentioned in the letters and in comments tonight about traffic and parking issues. So my understanding and just to confirm with with with staff is what we're looking at tonight is a development permit for form and character. And so that doesn't incorporate the all the parking issues, the parking allocation and everything that that was previously covered um when the um the amendment uh to the bylaw uh was was approved in the past. That's right. Yeah, that was considered by council when the zoning amendment application was made back in 2023.

Um council did request traffic impact assessment. I'm looking at the minutes of the September 11th, 2023 council meeting when that traffic impact assessment was requested. That report was submitted. It's available on the town's website under the completed development applications page for 2024. It's public. Anybody can read it. Um so yeah, that the issue of the density in the development, like the amount of floor area, that was all discussed and decided by council when the zoning amendment was approved back in January 2024. What's before you today is just the development permit for the look of the building, the landscaping, the site layout. That's what's up for discussion today, right? Yeah. Thank you for that. And I think you know people who aren't uh necessarily familiar with these uh type type of processes may may struggle with um you know what what we're looking at.

But in terms of the form and character, it's like you say, we're looking at the positioning of parking or bike racks, uh, entryways, the design of the building, balconies, that sort of thing. We're not revisiting the density of the building or the parking requirements. It's it's these other sort of form and character things. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, councelor. I'll turn to councelor Novik next. Uh, thank you, mayor. uh and through you to staff. Um my concern is is one of process I think um you've explain kind of explained it uh that basically this is a new development permit application but what we're doing is we're bypassing the committee the whole advisory planning committee uh the mail out uh I think that was about all there anything else Um, there would be no mail out for a development permit major. There's no mail out in the process.

There there was a mail out in 2023 for the zoning amendment component, but there wouldn't be a notice for this development permit application. So, typically there's no public engagement period for a development permit. There is for variance, but not for just a straight development permit. Is that correct? That's correct. There's a radius mail out requirement for a development variance, but not for a development permit. And in terms of the committee of the whole, there's no more committee of the whole meeting scheduled until mid November. So any development applications that we had ready to bring forward to council or committee of the whole, we're bringing forward now before the pause for the election process.

Okay. So, so that that process that we normally do for a development permit uh do uh I guess council has the authority to bypass those those steps. Uh is that correct? So, if we prove it, then we're essentially giving authority to staff to bypass those steps. If we don't approve it, then then we go back to square one. The steps aren They're laid out in the the land use procedures bylaw, but things are only referred to council upon or sorry, only referred to the advisory planning commission if council makes a resolution to do so. It's not a required step. Council may choose to do so or may not.

It's not required. Okay. So that essentially in this new process, this new development permit, there have been no uh compulsory steps that have been either bypassed or overlooked. We've done everything according to the book. Is that correct? That's right. That's correct. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, councelor. Councelor Nov or Councelor Tul, please. Thank you, mayor. Uh just to clarify through you to staff to make sure I'm I'm understanding this correctly. The subdivision that's referenced in the SA the staff report is not referring to a subdivision of the parcel separating the marina and the residential component. It's referring to uh separating the air parcel from the remainder. Is that correct? That's correct. Yes.

Okay. And um I may be confusing iterations of this because as you note this came to me the whole this went to APC. Uh this came before council. There was considerable public input. At one point there was a commercial component uh included with this which was removed including I think any utilization of the marina office for amenity space etc. Is that correct? That's correct. Yeah. The previous version of of one of the previous versions of this development did have a little commercial space in the ground floor of the residential apartment building. That's not in this proposal. Thank you. And um lastly through the mayor to staff. Um I I think I heard a suggestion during public participation that perhaps there was concern at the prospect of having to register a flood hazard on the the covenant. Uh our story flood hazard covenant on title for this particular property. Uh but correct me if I'm wrong. That practice is far from unusual in the town of Sydney. Correct.

That's correct. It is a standard process. Yeah, it's very common. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, councelor Garnet. Next, please. Thank you, Mayor. Three to staff. And I just have one question. As I look through the next item coming on the agenda under 12A from last week, this seems very similar to the 2180 expedited approval process that we we carried as a motion unanimously last week and for for tonight. So would that be a fair statement? Yes, that's true. Great. Thank you. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, counselor. And so I did ask this question of the applicant after the presentation and I will I will turn the same question though I think it has been answered through other questions from colleagues is that while there is a new development application uh in process um all of the information submitted in that application um uh is the same as the information uh that was that was uh in the previous application.

The required information to make it a complete application was submitted, but as it outlines in the report, a number of slight alterations to the look of the building have been made from what council approved in 2024. So, I'm not sure if that clarifies things, but there's a number of little changes that were made. Is that what you were asking? No, that does that does clarify because again, the question has been was was answered to the sense that in terms of those changes, uh I believe you indicated that those were as a result of building code. U many of them were they were yeah to address issues that came up as the building permit application was under review. Um the location of the padmounted transformer for the electrical service um the change in the size of the entry canopy at the east pedestrian entrance to the building due to structural limitations. They're all outlined on page two and three of the staff report. And as I said, those were already approved at a staff level in the

DP minor process because they weren't changing the gross floor area of the building or reducing parking. So they were done internally by staff. So we're just highlighting them in the report so you can see what the differences are from the application that came to council for approval back in January 2024. Thank you. Any further questions uh of staff? If not, we have a recommendation to consider moving forward. It is. It is. Sorry, ma'am. Sorry. Councelor Intel. Thank you. If you're ready, I'll move the recommendation, please. Thank you. I'll move that development permit number DP1000863 to allow the forming character of a four-story 61 unit multi-unit residential development be approved subject to the following conditions. A, prior to issuance of building permit one, register a restrictive covenant on title for the property prohibiting the future owner or strata council from passing any bylaws that may restrict occupancy of the building based on age.

Two, register a flood hazard covenant on the title of the property referencing the submitted engineers report. Three, pay to the town a deposit in the amount of 115% of the estimated cost to complete the hard and soft landscaping for the development. Four, pay to the town a deposit in the amount of 120% of the estimated cost to construct offsite works and services in order to improve the full road rightway width of the eastern terminus of White Birch Road. Five, provide a statutory right of way in favor of the town of Sydney registered on title to allow for public access along the waterfront marina side of the property. And six, pay to the town a bonus density payment calculated for the maximum base density of the RM5 zone.

We have it moved. Do we have a second? I'll second. Thank you. I'll turn to the movers, please. Uh, thank you, mayor. Clearly, I know that um this is not what people in this room want to see move forward. And I guess where I feel um uh sincerely uh disappointed for you with respect to this process is that um I think it's I think it created a sense of false hope that that this could be revisited in another context. And I say that because um we went through I think what was a difficult process two years ago to get to the point where this was approved. Um I'm I'm disappointed uh frankly, you know, with the the process that's happened in the last two years that we're here tonight. I you know and I know uh that they had every right to move forward this for two years and we're we're unable to. We've been told why.

Um, I'm not suggesting I'm completely sympathetic to their position because I'm not. I don't think that it was particularly well addressed with the neighboring property owners andor with this council, frankly. So, I'm I'm disappointed in where we're at. Yes. But this is a project two years ago on this basis that was approved. where there will be I think long-term concerns you have noted and that's around the volume of traffic on what is essentially a laneway that in inevitably will be something that this town has to continue to monitor and pursue and I'm sure that you'll provide uh feedback on that on that front. Um, we all knew, those of you who live immediately to this development know better than the rest of us, something was coming to that property sooner or later. And uh, I I tend to think aesthetically that it is more pleasing than a parking lot that frankly looked rather derelictked at times when I've visited. and um I think is is in my view an improvement

overall to the neighborhood where the concern lingers and the town will have to monitor closely I think is on the impact of traffic in particular on White Birch. So um somewhat regrettably um I'm supporting to see this essentially this project renewed uh to enable it to move forward. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, Councelor Inul. Councelor Novik. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I've I've really struggled with with this uh particular item. Uh, I've listened to a lot of people speak to it, uh, including the developer, but also a lot of the residents in the area. I'm sympathetic to their concerns, but at the same time, as councelor Renul said, this this was inevitable.

The first iteration of discussion around this project, as uh councelor Renul stated was quite intense. uh the size of the building was reduced and uh I accept that it wasn't reduced enough for the liking of many of the residents because the uh the overall size of the building is is what's going to determine the uh additional traffic to that part of town. So I understand that that's uh a perceived problem. I don't know how real that problem will be once the building is built and and people move in. Um I suspect things aren't always as bad as they may appear to be. But at the same time, uh this development permit application has gone according to the book. Uh it has met all the requirements.

um this air parcel thing which is is probably more confusing than uh than most of us are used to. Uh is what put it over the hump and uh if it wasn't for that the holes would already have been dug and the superructure probably would have been in by now and we wouldn't be having this meeting here tonight. And I haven't heard anything that would suggest that that shouldn't go ahead according to plan. There haven't been substantial changes in the project. Uh and the resistance from the community is the same as it was two years ago. I I accept that. I understand that's a problem. But at the same time, uh, I haven't heard any solid evidence that suggests that the project shouldn't go ahead.

So that for that and the reasons I've stated earlier, I'm I'm going to support this for the time being. Thank you. Thank you, councelor. Councelor O'Keefe, please. Uh, thank you, mayor. Um I regrettably um will will support this, but I I wanted to explain why. Um I when this came forward for reasonzoning, I I was opposed to it because I didn't and I voted against it because I had concerns as residents have expressed tonight about the additional density and the I'm familiar with that area. It is a laneway and um the additional density that we improved allowed the developer to almost double the amount of units. I mean same amount of space but because of the the new way we were calculating density it allowed them to uh build 61 units whereas before I think was around 38 or something. Um so I I I was opposed to that and for many of the reasons that you've brought up here tonight. However, um we chose says a that council chose to

to to approve that. So so that ship has kind of sailed in terms of uh we we can't now revisit the density that is that is done. We made that decision. There will be 61 units there. So now my job as a coun counselor is to now look at the form uh the form and form and character requirements. So it's it wouldn't be appropriate for me to say uh because I didn't like it before um I'm going to uh not not approve the form and character. So what I'm kind of restricted to looking at is what are the form and character elements that we're looking at? And so that doesn't include density. It doesn't include parking or traffic congestion. It's limited to the things that staff talked about about the positioning of the building, the sighting of it, where the internal pathways are going to going to be, what is the landscaping going to look like, what is the cladding on the building going to look like, those sorts of things. So um when I look at those things just strictly on that um all of

those things have gone to our advisory planning commission to look at in the past in uh in the previous uh iteration and um they they they were fine with that. They're people who know more about these things than uh than we do and they were happy with that and and I'm happy with them as as well. Um, in regards to some of the concerns brought up about, well, there's there's major changes here, significant changes, what I clarified with staff was in terms of the flood construction levels that were updated. Those have been incorporated into this development and there will be a uh something on the title to to uh signify that that was cleared by an an engineer. So, I have to be happy with that. And um and so although that I'm I'm not completely happy with the additional density that will be there, that's really not a part of the discussion for tonight. And as uh my colleague councelor Renul has said, I think I think it will be an issue. I think the concerns you brought up about about

traffic and parking, I think there will be issues there. Um, so I'm not not going to argue with you on that. Uh, and that's something that we will I I'm not sure how, but we'll have to to look at that. I know that for the the residents of Harbor Landing, the issue of the cut through there is a big thing. Um, I think there's an application to our staff to deal with that. So, I would encourage you to continue following through with that process. Um, thank you for all your feedback and on this and um, I hope we'll be able to address the parking and congestion that I I believe we will see. Um, that's all for me.

Thank you. Thank you, councelor O'Keefe. Councelor Garnett, thank you, Mayor. [clears throat] And likewise, thanks for everybody for coming out and all the letters. Um, I think my colleagues have already spoken to some of the main points about the fact that this is we're not revisiting a zoning bylaw. Staff has indicated it's in full compliance. The parking issues. They're meeting the parking requirements for what the town of Sydney requires. Um, they can there's a whole other debate around looking at that bylaw maybe in the future to see if it needs to be adjusted, but in this time and and space, it's it's meeting what's required. Um, and most of the changes are minor. Um, and that's why it's called a development permit minor. And when that happens, it is dealt with at a staff level. It doesn't come to council for consideration. Doesn't go to the public. It's just these are minor tweaks. And in this case, it's building code related. So, that's actually a good

thing. Um, your your concerns are legitimate. I think we we mentioned that when we went through this the first time. This was a a difficult decision. And I think this particular lot's gone through several iterations. Uh, councelor O'Keefe spoke to the change. which I think before was units per hectare on that lot and that was allowed for 34 units I believe at the time and uh then when we switched it to floor air ratio it became they could have a larger density. Um the I would just I think I pointed out way back when we had this discussion two years ago and I think it's important for context although I do agree with my colleagues there's likely to be some kind of unintended consequence from extra traffic just but that you could say that throughout the whole community to be honest with you the way the way the development's happening the way the government wants us to develop with density or popping more houses into more units in into smaller spaces and you know we're only requiring so much parking and people have more than one

car or they have children they cars and they need more space. But that's that's that's townwide. So that's that's that's it becomes challenging in that context. But I would I would just like to say for historical context, I can imagine back in the 1970s when 2040 and 2050 White Birch were built 80 units that would have had a huge impact on that neighborhood in terms of traffic, what they were used to. So this does happen. Harbor Landing, the actual subdivision itself of several homes. For those of us who have been around a while, our kids went to North Sanish. That's where the North Sanish Middle School was if you haven't been around long enough. Uh both my kids went there and that was a building with a little bit of parking and a huge open field. And now you have all these extra homes and all these extra cars. So that has also contributed to the traffic in there as the town houses on rest haven have and the developments on John and you can go down

the road all the way down to Quanis and it all builds together and and unfortunately when you you know that's what's considered progress and if we don't build those units then you don't get to live in this beautiful community. So, you know, it all has an impact everywhere all in the community. It's going to have an impact in yours as well. And uh as councelor Renul has mentioned, this goes forward, you know, then we'll need to look at something. Maybe there'll need to be some traffic calming measures that'll come through and your community can bring those forward or we can look at ways to maybe widen a road or but that'll all come in time as we see what impact this has this development has. It's not going to be completely forgotten. Clearly you guys have voices. So once that building goes in, if if there's problems that arise, I have no doubt that you'll come to town to come to council of the day and and

discuss it and then there's solutions that can be can be brought forward. But in the instance of what's being required here today, this is essentially the same development that was already approved. So there's nothing different. The FCL has been dealt with. There's minor minor changes. There's just I mean there's to me it would be really difficult to say no to them given the the fact that if it wasn't for the airspace parcel for the financing which is why it's rental. So that's an important cons consideration here is that's why it's rental gives them that CHC financing. It allows them to build the building and if I'm going to be consistent as a counselor in my decision-m just a week ago we allowed something as I asked staff very similar to 2180 Beacon Avenue. They had the same process, not in terms of an airspace parcel, but there were things that cause delays in theirs to get forward. And so now we've said, "Sure, you're not

changing much. It's pretty much the same build. We're give you approval to have an an expedited process for your development permit." So, if I was to say no here, and I said yes there, consistency matters. And I think that I think there the the asks are very similar. So, I'm I'm okay with supporting it. And I know you guys are not going to be happy with this. you were hoping for something different, but I think you've had some pretty good explanations from colleagues as to why this is going to move forward. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councelor Gette. Not seeing any other first-time speakers, so I will speak to this. I'm I'm in full support of this development.

I was in support of it when it came forward. Uh I think we uh we spoke to, as has been indicated earlier, to the resoning application uh and then the development permit. Uh we've also heard this evening through the presentation and through the report from staff and the presentation from staff the questions from the proponent the questions to staff that there isn't anything substantial material uh in terms of changes of this development than the development that staff have been working on the development application that staff have been working on for many months now. Things changed during that process with regards to flood control level with regards to the air parcel with regards to building code changes, but there is nothing substantial. And indeed in terms of form and character if this had come forward to a committee of the whole and council was considering uh and we could consider it tonight. If uh if we were considering forwarding it to APC, we would only send it we would only reasonably send it to APC if there were material differences in form and

character for the advisory planning commission to consider. And we've heard this evening that there that there isn't. But let me turn to to another aspect of the process. We've heard individuals during public participation this evening ask if they would have the opportunity to ask questions after the presentation. We had two speakers just as we started our deliberations ask if they were able to ask a question because while we were asking questions of the proponent and having them answered, we were asking questions of staff and having them answered and members of myself and other members of council may understand it. At least two members of the audience didn't. And our normal process and it was instituted by by council member in a previous term was when an a development u permit major application comes forward to council at committee the whole we provide an opportunity for public participation after the presentation.

We don't bring that to when the application comes to uh this evening. uh and as staff have indicated um uh we are expediting the process for the reasons that have been provided this evening. However, this is it's a concern to me that given we've introduced this good process in the past uh when a development application comes forward to allow the public a public participation opportunity and by virtue of it coming to committee the whole and and even after that public participation period after the presentation and any questions it then is forwarded to council which actually allows members of the public to consider it further and bring back any questions or further comments.

And so you haven't received that process and given the volume of of correspondents at at some 48 letters, the number of speakers this evening, the number of people in the audience, when you saw a new application, you thought we would be going through uh those processes and you would have the opportunity to comment further. Uh the four speakers before me have indicated that uh have have have provided their uh motivation and indicated that uh they are hopeful that you are understanding of um what changes did occur when they occurred in the process and and and the process that we're following tonight. Um, while I'm concerned about not providing further opportunity because I I I I believe there are probably still some questions amongst amongst audience members this evening or or amongst your neighbors uh in your neighborhood. Um uh I'm I'm not because there is no material change to this development than than previously approved. I I don't see um I don't see merit in in in postponing this application into the next term with with new members of

council and and and deliberating further on this. I'll leave my comments there. Not seeing any other speakers. I'll look to call the question those in favor. It carries unanimous. Thank you. We will take a uh fivem minute recess uh and reconvene at 8:25. Thank you.

We'll reconvene our meeting and uh thank you councelor Duck for uh for rejoining and uh we're next turning to item uh 10 sorry 11A uh which is council report verbal report on CHD water commission from councelor Duncan. Yeah, thank you. The uh CRD water commission had our last meeting before the election as well. Uh and we did the the uh approval of the new CRD bulk water rate. And so when that comes forward for council to be approving the budget for the new municipal rate, you'll be starting with the CRD rate of uh 99 cents per cubic meter. So for the average household in the CRD, that's an additional $14 a year. They'll be paying just for this for the CRD water.

Obviously, it'll be more once municipal rates are added. Um, but I guess good news for the people who are uh living within the First Nations jurisdictions is that the CRD has been working has begun working over the past few years in creating bulk water um agreements with the first various First Nations. So that right now they're kind of every municipal user is a secondary water user. We have bulk water rate plus municipal. But if they're on reserve, they're paying bulk water municipal or reserve. They're paying an extra rate. And so part of what they've been trying to do uh for the sake of equity because obviously they're not the people who can afford to pay more and yet they are being forced to pay more um is is to develop a bulk water rate straight to their reser to uh to the reserves and then um the difference between the municipal and the the CRD rate is being rolled back in to to the entire region

CRD rate. So it's less than a cent that we that gets added on. It's not actually something we can calculate how much that costs, but it does mean that the people who are there save a lot more money. Um, and we now have uh four First Nations that have agreements that there should be or by 2027 we should have four of the First Nations on those agreements and uh hopefully many others will become coming forward soon. Um we received the statutory approval of the CRD's DCC's for uh just for the water services. Uh and we were told that probably um given the way projects are in stream, we won't begin to see a cash flow back to the Sier's water capital reserves from those DCC's for about five years. Um but they they are in place and so developers will certainly know that they're coming by the time we start seeing that money coming in. Um the five-year capital plan that was that's going forward um

previously when this came forward was 350 million. It's been reduced to 300 million. And that's not because we're doing less projects. We're doing all the same projects are in that plan. uh it's that staff kind of reviewed our projects over the years and discovered that we were constantly celebrating we were coming in under budget and so they they revised it to to think that the the estimate of what things will cost will be more accurate. So even with increased construction costs and increased materials costs and everything we've had since the pandemic um they were able to uh bring that down to a more realistic uh estimate. Um the 2027 budget however because of some pull forward projects and pull forward uh staff acquisitions increased by $2 million to $23 million just for the next year component. Um, and the last thing which is kind of cool is that uh there's a the humpback connector uh part of the the pipeline that's going through has it drops in height substantial elevation. And so a

microurbine was put in there to actually reclaim the electric the the energy and use it to run a generator. And so we had some discussion about um that new technology and kind of the time frame it would take. So it's not going to be a big money maker. You know, it'll take 20 30 years basically over the lifespan of the turbine. It will eventually, we hope, make a little money, break even, depending on where you draw those lines. But um the CRD felt this was something to to kind of experiment with because we will have infrastructure in place over a big area for a long time. And if we can get this one right and start getting this in place, then it'll become more efficient over time. And hopefully we will be able to start having more of this technology and actually reclaim energy from just the gravity flow of our water. So if anyone has questions about uh the budget or capital plan, go ahead.

Thank you, councelor Duncan, for that update. Councelor O'Keefe, please. Uh, thank you through you too, Councelor Duncan. So, the um the water DCC's, what do those amount to? Um, and um is it distributed evenly? Like whether it's a one-bedroom unit in Sydney or Souk or Victoria, is it the same same across the board? Oh gosh. Uh this was I know since it was such a minor report back just to say we got the statutory approval and we had such big discussions about this years ago. I I don't really want to throw a figure [laughter] per bedroom, but it does. Yeah, it's I mean it's like like RDC they they will pay a different amount depending on the the number of doors to a unit single family versus multifamily. Um and green field is different from infill and there is a very large report which is available on the CRD's website [laughter] with the specifics of that.

Thank councelor Novik. Thank you mayor. Uh two uh comments one one comment and one question. Um with regard to the agreements with the u the first nations I think one of them is already in place. I think it's the south um and and the rest are instream as as you mentioned. Yeah. And there there are some out on with the Wanda Fuca um region was the one that would put in the first agreements. Yeah. And uh I'm I'm intrigued by the idea of um of a turbine in the um in the distribution system to generate electricity. I think it's brilliant and I can't believe nobody thought of it years and years and years ago. Uh but my question is do you have any sense of whether or not that would impact water pressures at the dist at the distribution sense uh areas or would those simply be picked up by pumps along the way and if so wouldn't that kind of be defeating the purpose of having the turbine?

I think it's you know it's like having a turbine in a in a hydroele electricity dam right they as the water flows through it it spins turbine and so know that I understand but that would impact the pressure of the water at the other end because we have we have lots of water engineers that [laughter] may if I may most um most uh water systems that have high gravity uh feed like our system require what typically uh typically require pressure reducing valves because the pressure that builds up in the pipes is quite significant and in uh incorporating a turbine would actually it's effectively uh generating um electricity from that pressure and reducing that pressure at the same time. So it's like taking a pressure reducing valve and turning it around.

Okay. And that makes sense. Thank you, mayor. Thank you. Thank you again for the report. I'll turn to councelor Ganette with an update on tree appreciation day. Thank you, mayor, and uh thank you for allowing me this little bit of time. know it was a little bit of a late item to the agenda. Uh yeah, on Saturday we uh celebrated the 7th annual tree appreciation day and there were 36 people that came out. Um there were 30 maple trees. They're a little bit they're they're not the little saplings. They're but they're not huge. So they're big enough to be heavy. These were planted along the south portion of the Cal the new Calvin multi-use path that's been paved. And then after the trees were planted, um there were some ivy pole and there they got 7 cubic meters or the equivalent of about 44 bathtubs of invasive English ivy and is removed from the Calvin Lockside Trail area on the Calvin path and also in Wrathtown

Park. Um this was this has been done in conjunction with Victoria Green Team. They've been our been our supporter for many years. Um and I would like to just uh have a special shout out for some of our staff. So, uh, the town of Sydney staff, Christy, um, she's involved in the organizing of this event and she shows up and stays for the whole thing, does a fabulous job. And, um, our junior arborist, Denby, if anybody hasn't met him yet, he's a young young fella that's been around for a short time. He's he's under the toutelage of our arborist, Mike. And, um, these guys do an amazing job. They dig they pre-dig the holes.

They're there. They show everybody how to properly plant trees. They're walking back and forth making sure everything's done just right. and they do go back after in case we don't do it perfect to make sure they have beautiful trees lining that path in the future. And I just want to thank everyone who showed up that day. I don't know if they'll watch this meeting, but it's really great when you have people come out from the community and they come from far and wide and they're all for a purpose, just to make our community a better place, and it's uh it's quite an uplifting day. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, counselor, for the update. Very positive.

So, we're next turning to uh committee reports. Uh, we have um, mayor, I had a question on that report. Sorry, on councelor Garnett's report. Yes, please go ahead. Um, I just want to supplement that report because I met with a staff when they were preparing that area. I live in that neighborhood and um I want to extend further thanks to staff because they actually took some rather um I think impolite uh actions from neighbors in that area that didn't want to see trees there and and uh I think that's our staff handled it very well and I just think they should be commended for moving it forward. One of the reasons those trees get to be planted there easily by volunteers to staff who prepare the ground for it. Um and um they have to deal with the consequences of people that don't like the actions.

And I I I I think that's unfortunate they had to deal with that. And u just want to shout out to the staff for that that uh courtesy and um perseverance. Thank you. Thank you, counselor. We're next moving to committee reports. We have a single item that is uh we are receiving the minutes of our committee the whole meeting on September 21st and there are four recommendations. Councelor Novvic was the chair of committee the whole I will turn to you to read in the recommendations and just a gentle note that we can read in from uh where where it says recommendation. Thank you mayor. And uh the first recommendation R1 development permit application number DP1000861.

The recommendation is for set permit for 2180 Beacon Avenue West to allow the form and character of fivetory 140 unit multi-unit residential apartment building with surface parking and one level of underground parking be approved subject to the following conditions. One, that prior to issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall a install tree protection fencing around any boulevard trees being retained and around the tree protected around the three protected Douglas fur trees on site to be retained to the satisfaction of the director of engineering. and B ensure that a certified arborist be on site at a time of any excavation in the vicinity of protracted protected root zones and C obtain a tree removal permit for the removal of 73 protected cascara trees and two protected Douglas fur trees and D pay to the town a deposit in the amount of 115% of the estimated cost to complete the hard and soft landscaping ing for the development.

We have that moved. Second and seconded. Any discussion? Uh no, I have nothing. Mayor, seeing no further discussion, all in favor that carries unanimous. Thank you. Please continue. Thank you, mayor. Uh recommendation number two is uh for development permit. Just just read from recommendation from the recommendation that further consideration of development permit application number DP1000860 and development variance permit application number DV1000392 for 2240 James White Boulevard be postponed until the applicant has received a decision from the building code appeal board. Second moved and seconded. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor carries unanimous. Thank you. And recommendation number three that al number one that alternative three be selected as the longerterm approach for distribution of property taxes among property classes and number two that the policy be further amended by deleting the requirement to review during each council term. We have it moved.

Second and seconded. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor that carries unanimous. Thank you. And the fourth recommendation regarding Bower Bank Bikeway alternatives. The recommendation is number one that Southbound Bower Bank at Piery be reopen to all traffic immediately. Number two, that community engagement on the next steps be initiated in the next 60 days with mailouts to the neighborhoods of Bower Bank and Sidol, followed by popups at the intersection of Sitall and Mills and Bower Bank and Calvin, as well as outreach through the town's other avenues. And three, that staff provide viable options on further traffic calming on Bower Bank and Sidol. Second moved and seconded by councelor Duck. I'll turn to the movers. Nothing to add.

Councelor Duck, just to add that there were some um communications both through email and on um social media that this is the initiation of of um engagement, not the completion of uh of community engagement the next 60 days and that any community engagement is open to all community members, not just the neighbors that live on sit or on barbank. So, this is a a fully open process to engage um all of the residents of the town that have may have some uh thoughts on what should happen in this bikeway. Thank you. Thank you, councelor O'Keefe. Uh thank you. Um I'm supportive of this. I just reiterate again, you know, I did have some reservations about whether we we reopen it right away or whether we should have engagement first before doing that. Um, and the the reason I agreed to go along with this as it was is just because of that safety issue that um I see pretty well every day of people scooting scooting through there.

Um, so that was a big concern for me. Um also when we talk about um next steps to be initiated in the next 60 days, I mean to me that means you know initiated as and I think we talked about it last time that staff in the next 60 days. I think they were talking about maybe Novemberish coming forward with a proposal and here's how they see engagement proceeding. And I didn't have an expectation that, you know, engagement would be completed in in 60 days, but that staff would at least say here's what we're proposing to do. So that's kind of my expectation on that.

If I hope that's staff's understanding as well. Thank you. Further speakers? Councelor Novik, you still have your mic on. Just Thank you. I I'll speak in opposition to this as I did last week, but I want to um I want to I guess provide some additional rationale uh for that. Um the residents uh area residents have have criticized council for taking a a decision uh to create the bikeway without sufficient uh community engagement. Uh and now we're putting forward a motion to uh take action without engagement. We're we're repeating uh the the process that the residents uh had issues with uh again uh and we're taking one of several possible actions. As one of the speakers on Bower Banks uh said this evening, uh the expectation, the desire is to have both the PICY and the SL uh diversions reopened. Well, this motion is dealing with the with the Percy. It's not dealing with the sit.

So, I don't think we're following good process. Uh is is number one uh is we're making uh we were criticized for making a decision without engagement and here we are making another decision without engagement. Second is that the rationale for the decision to close the Percy uh traffic diversion is safety issues, safety concerns. I'll turn to staff if staff can comment on a a safety if this is a safety issue at uh at Percy. Is is there evidence of safety concerns? Can I ask for some clarification on the question? Well, Mr. Murphy, you you provided a report to council and and that report, as I recollect, did not uh draw attention to safety issues associated with the with the Percy traffic diversion.

Is that correct? Can you say again? Okay. You did speak to in the in your report that came to to council at a previous meeting. Uh it did make reference to there being infractions on people driving through the Piery uh traffic diversion. Uh however, it was not raised as a safety concern. Uh right. So the staff report doesn't raise the issues at the diversion uh to the level of needing to take action uh based on them. Uh certainly we're aware that uh people are or drivers are driving intentionally driving through driving through um and then anecdotally and they're I'm not disputing the observations that uh there are drivers driving around the diversion. Um but there hasn't been data or uh alarms raised from anything other than observations about that. Thank you.

And and so my concern is is that uh we have members of council who have indicated that it is a tra safety concern to them based on near misses. Um we are not traffic engineers. We are not enforcement which the RCMP is and I think we should have evidence when we are making our decision and as Mr. Murphy has indicated we do not have data with regards to safety. I do want to comment with regards to safety in terms of the traffic diversion was created to lower the volumes on Bower Bank to to be a AAA bikeway and it has been successful and the data that was collected that showed it successful was while people were uh driving through uh the bikeway.

So it isn't that people are driving through uh that traffic diversion at Percy and and creating higher traffic volumes that would uh that would not AAA um AAA concerns. So I have the the issues over engagement. I have the the issue over using ethnics. Um that uh we have not had the evidence provided by staff through data or our uh local policing uh and that uh this is a partial decision and uh uh while I appreciate and and a member of the public spoke tonight that there are many people in favor of that uh good process still uh means using evidence uh when making decisions. I'll leave my comments there. Oh, sorry. I do have one uh more um item and that is uh councelor Kef raised this and that is the second recommendation. The community engagement on the next steps be initiated in the next 60 days with mailouts uh to the neighborhoods. Uh one reading that would expect that uh that the actual engagement part of the process would be

occurring uh in the next 60 days. And we've heard uh the comment from uh from councelor O'Keefe that uh there's an understanding that while it is worded this way that in fact the actual engagement not might not occur for some period after the 60 days. Uh could staff comment in terms of what the next steps are given that we are going from this last council meeting or this meeting with uh last meeting with this council and into a new council meeting uh on on November 14th. Uh thank you, mayor. Um since the last uh council meeting, um staff have had a few uh quick conversations on this to understand the resolution and and uh interpret it. And it's uh my recommendation that staff would be bringing back an engagement strategy to the new council uh at their earliest opportunity which may be at the uh November 9th meeting um which would be their first regular council meeting uh for the new council to consider. It is a little premature to determine what that agenda

will look like. So, it is entirely possible that there could be other more pressing items that would shift this to a later council meeting, but from our early read of this resolution and from what I just heard this evening from a couple of council members, I think the the best approach would be to bring that engagement strategy back to council for confirmation and clarification. Thank you. I would move an amendment that the second recommendation that uh uh community engagement strategy be brought back uh to the next council uh to not create misleading expectations with it being initiated in the next 60 days. I'll seek I'll seek a second for the I'll seek a second for the amendment. Yeah. Thank you.

Um so I you know uh there's expectations uh and staff have indicated what the process will be. Uh an engagement a report with engagement an engagement strategy which could be further amended uh will be brought at the earliest opportunity of of November 4th or a meeting thereafter uh for the new council's consideration. and they may choose to to amend that strategy uh that's brought forward. Uh and there will be a timeline to uh to implement uh that engagement for uh for council's consideration. So I think it's more reasonable uh to amend this that uh uh that an engagement strategy be brought forward to the next uh council rather than uh uh this motion that it will be initiated within 60 days. Turn the secondary.

I I think that's a really good um amendment because I I had re uh reservations and from which were the same as as the last time we moved this and and as you actually restated eloquently and added to and so I I think that amendment addresses um my reservations about the public's expectation about how this would go forward and the fears I had about um the same criticisms continuing to come back over and over because um the public had not understood the scope of the uh what the engagement would be and what would potentially be on the table as an actual trafficcoming measure and and all of that before it went out to them. And so um I would be happy to see this now because I would like the next council to get uh some closure on this issue. So thanks.

Any further discussion? Councelor Keith. Uh, thank you. Um, I'm I'm okay with I I think it's good to clarify. The way I understand it is that um the motion is the amended would be that community engagement strategy be brought forward to the next council. Um, and I'm I think I I like that, but I I guess what what's missing for me is a time frame. And so just to leave it ended. I'm I'm not com comfortable with. So I what I had been hearing from staff is that they seem to think it was reasonable that they could come forward with a first draft. Um that might be maybe November if it you know goes to the into December. Um you know that that would be fine. But where are we now? October. No, September, October, November. Um, so I I think it's important to have some some time frame whe whether it would be by by the end of the third you of of the final quarter or something like that.

So, so is it is it appropriate to make an amendment to an amendment? We can we can make one amend we can make a one we can make an amendment to an amendment but we can't go further than that. Okay. And I guess maybe before doing that it just sort of get an indication from staff whether you know whether 60 days is fine or whether to give you a little bit more wiggle room to say by the end of the fourth quarter is is better. I think a little more wiggle room is always welcome uh uh given um some uncertainty. Uh typically 60 days would be adequate time to develop the strategy. Um but again as we're transitioning into a a new council uh and with orientation requirements a little wiggle room is always welcome.

Thank you. So I I would propose an amendment to the amendment which is that we would just tag on to the end of it uh like so to be brought forward to the next council by the end of the fourth quarter. Yes. Do we have a second for the amendment? Second. Second. Any discussion? Seeing none, I'll call a question. Those in favor? Opposed? Duck is opposed. The motion carries. Uh so we're now dealing with an amended amendment. Uh councelor motivation on the amended amendment. Council. Thank you, mayor. Um I guess my concern is is one of uh perhaps interpretation. Uh, it sounds to me like the original motion includes what we've just been talking about because it talks about initiating next steps. It doesn't talk about completing them or having them on the ground or or anything like that. It it simply means that we're going to start the process. The process might end in mid 2027. I'm not suggesting it should, but the way the uh original motion is

written. Uh I feel that the uh amendment to the amendment is redundant and I feel that the amendment is redundant. It doesn't it doesn't add anything. All it's doing is saying what this amendment already says because within the next 60 days, if we pass this today, it will be the time of the next council. And as long as we start the process, we're doing exactly what council will have uh asked for. So, I don't see the need for an amendment. I think it just muddies the waters. So, I won't support it. Thank you, Councelor Duck. So yes, I won't support this either because as uh councelor Novc is so well worded that that's the the motion directs initiation. Staff have indicated they can start in 60 days and they've indicated they'll bring something back in early November. The case here is we're initiating action and I think that's what the community wants to hear, not to hear that we've deferred it to the fourth quarter and and and there

they want to know that we're starting on it. And I think that's the important aspect of this motion is to show that we're initiating action on it, not necessarily completing it, but staff indicated they can start in 60 days to um give some sort of direction to this. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Garnett. Thank you. Just to to clarify, it says in initiated in the next 60 days. Just to keep the clarity there, we're still a council for a month. So we're still it's not the if you're saying the next council then it can't be within the next 60 days because we are still council if if you understand what I'm saying like it's it doesn't necessarily by the wording it doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be the next council if you leave next council out of it because in the next 60 days could still be us.

We're still the governing body till November second. So if I may sorry that's all I have to say. Thanks. Thank you. See no first time speakers. Councelor Nov I I I don't disagree with you but at the same time it's not limiting. That's the thing. The mo the way the motion's written it's not limiting. It's simply saying it'll be initiated and we know that there will be a new council as of November 2nd. So it necessarily includes the first month since it's the 28th today. It necessarily includes the first month of the new council. its semantics. I I I agree. But I I think the way that the way the initial resolution is worded, it covers all eventualities. We don't need further clarification in my view. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further discussion, councelor Keith? Um where where I think the the clarity comes is um staff indicated that a little bit of extra wiggle room would be appreciated. Um, you know, when we look at 60 days, um, the new council isn't going to be up and running until early early November. Um, they're going to be going through orientation. There's going to be a lot of different things going on for them to look at. So, you know, if it means that, uh, we have to go into December. Um, so that's past the 60 days, all we're doing is giving staff a little bit more wiggle room to get this done. So, I I don't I don't see it as a big whoopde-doo um pro a problem just to give staff a little bit of extra time.

That's out. I see this. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no further speakers, I'll look to call the question on the amended amendment uh which reads, as I understand it, that staff will bring forward a community engagement strategy uh by the end of uh fourth quarter. All in favor? opposed. Councelor Duck and Councelor Novik are opposed. The motion carries. So, we're back to the amended motion. Is there any further uh motivation on the amended motion? Councelor Keefe, just clarify. So, when you're um are you just talking about number two? You're talking about We are now voting on the entire recommendation. We're now voting on the entire recommendation with the second part being amended. successfully amended.

I'll just further add that while I think the uh the amendment uh brings clarification to uh to the intentions of of uh of council if there were to succeed, I still remain opposed uh for um uh not by abiding by good process with regards to making decisions before engagement and with uh not having staff identified uh with data that there is uh evidence of uh safety issues at Percy. I'll look to call a question. All those in favor? Thank you. Opposed councelor Duncan, myself and councelor are opposed. The motion carries. We're next turning to staff reports. The first under 13A is an update regarding policy DV-014 interimm flood control level. I'll turn to uh Mr. Nukem, our director of community planning, for an introduction, please. Good evening.

Good evening. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Uh so the town's interim flood construction level policy was first adopted in 2017 and uh its intent is to ensure that new development is safe from overland flooding by establishing a minimum uh geodetic elevation under which new construction will take place. Um at the time it was originally developed, that policy established a 5meter geodetic elevation uh as the sort of cut off for when the town would require an engineer's report uh on the property ensuring that it's safe for the use intended and uh typically with the engineers report it would be registered uh on title of the covenant. Um the engineers report would establish uh potentially a different lower geodetic elevation but the five meters was just the cutoff to require the report. That five meter number was at the time developed uh or came from staff's best knowledge uh and not from some specific study. Uh, as council knows, last winter we completed a more detailed uh study of uh potential flood hazard risks along Sydney's coastline with some more specific uh

flood construction level numbers in there. Uh there's a backshore number of 4.12 now and then uh different reaches along the shoreline with differing FCL numbers. Uh so we're looking to incorporate those updated numbers into the policy. Um, for some property owners, this would mean that uh a report is no longer required uh because the backshore properties have a lower FCL and so some properties might uh be between that 4.12 and five and no longer need a report. And for some foreshore properties, there might be an increased number of um uh properties requiring report as well. Generally though, we're looking to uh have a more specific approach to properties. And because this is based on our best available knowledge uh from that study and wouldn't be changed uh unless new information becomes available, we're also removing that interim label from the policy and just calling it a flood construction level policy as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Nukem. Are there any questions of the report? Not seeing any. We have a recommendation. Councelor Novik. Thank you. Uh I'll move the recommendation that policy DV0 you can just read the recommendation that policy DV014 flood construction level be approved as amended. Second. Sorry, I'm in the wrong place. My apologies. We have it moved and seconded. Uh any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? Motion carries unanimous. Thank you. And item 13B, status of outstanding council action items and strategic plan priorities. We have a report from our CEO, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Edwards, please. Thank you, Mayor. Um, before I get into the report, I did want to just take a moment to congratulate mayor and council on the completion of this four-year term. And I did want to share with you that it has been an absolute pleasure working with you. And um I do wish all of you the very best in whichever path life presents to you next. And and uh and I really truly have enjoyed my time with you and uh I know

that we still get to keep you as our governing body for the next month. So uh but this is our last uh real public meeting. And so I wanted to take this opportunity to recognize that and all of the hard work that you've done. It's a tremendous effort. uh you've accomplished a lot in this term and this report serves a little bit as a bookend uh to much that you have accomplished. Although it is titled outstanding action items, it these are action items that have yet to be completed. Um uh and they it but it does also um it it is also a good opportunity to say that much of the work that you have done is actually outstanding. So um the the title of the report does serve two meanings there. Um it is also interesting to note that this uh report is a a dynamic report and so it changes throughout your term. So the beginning of the term um is hopefully fairly small

um with perhaps some residual action items from the prior council but then it does tend to grow as council becomes ambitious and and new action items get placed on the report and then some get completed and and fall off the report. It is important to note that right now we've got 25 outstanding action items from council on this report and of that there are several that have actually been completed or have been operationalized and so really um maybe it's best that they're no longer on this uh outstanding report. Um and then additionally, uh once we go through the outstanding action items too, we'd like to take a moment to just uh provide a brief cap recap of where we stand with the council priorities. And there are 13 remaining council priorities that are um on on our report. Uh seven of which have really been completed. And so uh that does mean that there are some council priorities that will be uh will be um brought forward to the new council. Um, so just in the interest of time, rather than

going through each individual outstanding item, uh, I would suggest that perhaps we look at it page by page and, um, if any counselor had a question or comment on, uh, a particular item that they could raise that before we would then move on to the to the next page. Thank you, Mr. Edwards. That's helpful. Uh are there any questions uh from recommendation 1 to five on page one? I'm not seeing any. And looking online, are there any questions with regards to the recommendations 6 to 13 on page two? Councelor O'Keefe. Thank you. Um so mine are to do with accessibility. All mine are have to do with the accessible items. And I did have some communication sent some questions to staff. Um and so maybe I'll start first with the ones that I got responses on.

So number seven about the downtown parking study. And so this goes back to 20 2023. And so we did council asked uh SPACK to weigh in on the parking study. some recommendations came back with that in terms of um increasing the supply of accessible parking stalls and um I know we haven't had much success with that um so far. I mean there was an additional parking space at um Beacon Park which was really appreciated and I staff have in their response said that um you know as opportunities uh present themselves, they'll look into um adding some spaces. And I guess um I know that um members of SPACK actually went out with the previous director of engineering to identify some spaces. And so I'm just wondering, you know, whether we whether we made note of those and whether there's an opportunity to to kind of get moving on those. You know, it's it's something that I hear from SPACK members all the time. Hey, when are we getting those new spaces, right? And I feel bad,

you know, that when they say, well, we brought this up three years ago. Um, so it'd be nice to let them know that something is imminent hopefully. Mr. Murphy, please. So, my understanding is that the a number of spaces like specific locations and spaces have been identified and we have designs for them. Uh for the majority of them, however, they're taking advantage of the existing letdown, the driveway letdown for a business that is adjacent. And so there's a discussion that's needed with that business to ensure that they're on board and in agreement with their driveway let down being used for the purpose of accessing a new accessible space on the street adjacent. So, uh we can certainly look to see if we can advance at least a few of those upcoming. So, that's noted.

Okay. Yeah, that would be um appreciated. Thank you. Um the other one about the patio regulation. So, this is Yeah. So this is uh about two years ago and that was to be referred to spa and I understand in my response from staff today that the regulation is in place already. So we went ahead and did it without spax's input. So, um I guess I'm wondering if they give input now, um is there any value to that or you know or would we be in a position to change anything if Spack gave input for something that's already been in place? Uh thank you through the mayor to councelor O'Keefe. Um, so when the uh patio regulation bylaw, the updated bylaw was adopted in 2024, uh, when it received, second, and third reading, council referred the guide that was to be developed to explain the patio regulation bylaw. They referred the development of that guide to SPACK for review and comment.

Okay. Um, not the regulations themselves. So the regulations were set and then the guide to explain the regulations was referred to spa. Um unfortunately that guide uh so the draft is complete. It just got caught between uh two different staff turnovers that were working on it. Um and so we had hoped it to take it to SPACK uh this recent meeting that happened last week uh that we weren't able to do that. So it's going to go to the next one. Okay. Um certainly if you know SPACK uh has some strong thoughts about something in the patio regulations themselves um that might be problematic uh they could make a recommendation back to council to look at that as well and the bylaw could be amended too. So yeah that is moving forward.

Okay. Yeah thanks thanks for that. And then um the last one was was the um the one from about the emergency plans and so again So that was one that was what? Sorry, what number is that? Council. Oh, sorry. It's at the top of the page. Number six. Thank you. Um and so that involved um the staff was going to review our emergency plans and then incorporate um needs of persons with disabilities into that. Um I believe the chief came and made a presentation to Spa about emergency plans. um Spack had also said here's some resources or information that you could look at and then so the expectation was that that was going to be absorbed and thought about and then come back to to SPACK and I know that you know we talked about the um it says in here that it was going to be hire a consultant uh with a phased approach over two years. uh we did I thought include it in the 2024 budget and so now three years has passed and I'm just wondering if there's any elements of

that phased approach that have been completed or that's still um kind of on the to-do list. Mr. Edwards. Uh thank you mayor. Um this item is still on the to-do list. that has not really been advanced. Uh due to some staffing turnover and challenges and um and so uh again like all of the outstanding items, this can be you know a light shone on it to try to expedite it as as much as possible. Okay. Thank you. Um, and I guess sort of a more general question about the well these action items and maybe some of the other ones, but I'm wondering um does it is there uh would it help to incorporate these things into our accessibility plan? like would they would they perhaps get more focus and attention there rather than being on a long list of action items? And so does that sort of highlight it for staff um in a in a different way that would be useful?

I don't think it's necessary. the issue isn't about it being um uh not highlighted or or or staff not being aware of it. It's usually capacity issues. Um what we're not talking about here tonight, which um you know, I don't think we'd have time for is all of the things that we have completed. And there there is a very a much longer list of action items that have been completed. And so these ones do stand to t stand out because they haven't been um but it's generally due to capac due to capacity issues. And so um I don't I don't think it's necessary to to add this to the existing plan.

Okay. Okay. Fair enough. That's that's all for me. Thank you. If there's discussion no other discussion on items on that page. Any questions or discussion on items 14 to 19 on page three? Not seeing any. Uh items 20 to 25 on page four. Not seeing any. And then we have um priorities of actions in the 2022 to 2026 strategic plan that uh Mr. Edwards made reference to. Not seeing any. Thank you again, Mr. Edwards, for a brief. Sorry. No, I just had just a question in in terms of process. So, I presume that with the next council, they will get a copy copy of this and they'll decide I guess um for those things that are in progress or uh whether they want to carry on or how they want to prioritize those. I pursuit.

That's correct. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. So, we have the multi monthly building report under item 13C. There's no recommendations for information. Is there any questions or discussion? Not seeing any. Uh we're going to turn to correspondence and we move to item 14A. Um item 15.2. the email from El Comr expressing concern regarding the development of Power Bank and Powerbank Road and Rest Haven Drive. Councelor O'Keefe. Uh, thank you. Yeah, I I I wanted to bring this up. I' I've been hearing from people throughout the community about these new uh smallcale multi-unit um developments going going up. And this one submitted by uh Ms. comr really I I think illustrated to me very well some of the challenges and looking at this picture with this little tiny house being dwarfed by a a three a threestory structure um you know and there's starting to be more of this around the town and I I did send wanted to just touch base with staff in terms of um you know our limit itations with these sort of developments that have

come from the the province and um maybe for the benefit of the of the community whether they could just kind of through you mayor to to staff just kind of uh give a high level uh sort of response to people who are wondering about these things and and the restrictions that we're under with the uh the province. with these type of developments. Men, sure. Thank you. Through the mayor to councelor O'Keefe. Um, so you asked questions about this earlier today and Mr. Nukem and I had a chance to discuss and put together a response. So just to kind of paraphrase that response. So when the province brought in the smallcale multi-unit housing legislation, they made it clear in their policy guidance that DPS could continue to be required in areas where they already were required, but that new DP areas shouldn't be used or created in a way that frustrates or undermines the intent of that new housing legislation.

The province definitely continues to support DPS for environmental preservation and hazard areas and notes in their guidance that those type of DP areas should still apply provided they don't unreasonably restrict the required number of dwelling units that are permitted by the housing legislation. So the province released something called the provincial policy manual and site standards which was policy guidance intended for local government staff to really help everybody in BC implement this new legislation and figure it out. So in that policy guidance they indicate that the form and character development permit areas which are what we use to control the look of new new housing developments or new commercial or industrial developments. those form and character development permit areas, those have the greatest potential to negatively impact the creation of new housing units because of the restriction on the design and the time it takes to to go through those permit application processes when the provincial government's intent with this legislation is to really speed up the delivery of more housing. So, the policy

manual gives some guidance um to municipalities that are thinking of creating DP areas or making the smallcale multi-unit housing developments go through a permit process that controls the look of it. They really are dis they're discouraging local governments from using DP areas to control the form and character of housing up to six units in all but exceptional circumstances. It says and then it goes on to give some guidance about what to consider or what municipalities what principles we should be following if we are to effectively use development permit areas for controlling the form and character of the smallcale multi-unit housing like clear direction specific guidelines delegating approval to staff if there must be a development permit ensuring smallcale multi-unit housing projects are not subject to review by advisory de design panels or planning commission and recognizing constraints that are in the legislation that those do impact the look and that that's part of the legislation is that they're trying to make this blanket change across the province for all municipalities to just help enable more housing to be built on a smaller scale.

Did that kind of address what you were looking for? Yeah, thank you for I I know I realized you sent that earlier this afternoon, but thank you for repeating that for the benefit of citizens out there who are wondering about why are we allowing these things to be built like this. Um the other thing I I took away though from some of the information is that um there is there is a way that we could consider these things. Um but they have to be you know as you said very specific in that sort of thing. Um and in just doing some looking around in the last few weeks, there seem to be municipalities that are coming up that do have form and character guidelines for single uh smallcale multi-unit housing. So I I think it's something worth pursuing. not going to make a motion or anything tonight, but I appreciate the the information and the explanation and um maybe if I'm around next term, maybe we'll talk about it more.

Mayor, if I may, please. Thank you. Um and thank you for looking into this, Councelor O'Keefe. And and I'd be quite curious too to learn about those municipalities that have implemented those types of DPAs. I'd be curious uh how close they are to their target uh levels or because some uh municipalities, especially some of the larger ones, greatly exceed their target requirements, in which case I think the province would not be so concerned about um things like form and character DPAs. Uh whereas communities that may be closer to the cusp or or underachieving their targets, the province may be more concerned about adding layers of uh right of restriction.

Yeah. So, yeah. So, there's probably a a lot more to it and so that's why I would not propose anything different tonight. Um I think more sort of research and stuff needs to be done, but thank you for the information and and the response to this. That's all for me. Thank you, councelor O'Keefe. I'll turn to councelor Novak who requested raising item 15.6. Thank you, Mayor. Uh I'll try and be brief on this. Most of you recall that we had a a very vigorous discussion on on this topic when uh well early on probably about a year and a half ago in early 2025 shortly after President Trump came to power and started um well started badmouthing Canada and and and talking about tariffs and so on and so forth. Well, it's now a year and a half, almost two years later, and things have not improved. In if if anything, they have gotten worse, and the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated. And as I recall, it was a split vote on the question of

whether or not the flag, American flag should be flown on Beacon Wararf. I suspect it was. And I I was certainly one of the proponents who suggested at the time that um that we do keep the flag flying because we didn't really want to discourage uh what few American tourists were coming to uh Sydney uh from coming uh and that we had sufficient uh traffic from American tourists uh that warranted being uh hospitable and welcome and opening and open to receiving them in our community uh by flying the flag. Um however, and and of course that was controversial. A lot of people agreed with with that uh that point of view and and and plenty didn't. Um well, now it's a bit later and uh I'm starting to hear more and more concerns about that. Uh and and that perhaps the uh the tide has shifted, the balance had has shifted a bit in public opinion. Uh that would suggest that perhaps it is the right

time to lower the flag until the relationship with our neighbor of the south improves more uh substantially. And so, uh, I I guess, um, I I'm wondering if council has any kind of an appetite, uh, to reopen the discussion, uh, as as brief though it may be, uh, I'm I'm happy to make a a motion arising, uh, from from this that uh, that we lower the flag and if there's an appetite for a seconder and discussion, then we can take it from there. Thank you. Thank you, councelor Novik. I think good process is uh you know rather than council members indicating how they might view a mo a motion that is yet to be put on the floor it would be more appropriate if you wish to move the motion we will seek a second or if there's a second we'll have discussion thank you mayor I thought I did that in a somewhat roundabout way but I will I will be a little more precise now so I

will move that uh at the earliest convenience uh we remove the American flag from our various flag staffs on the waterfront. Do we have a second or second for discussion? We have a second or I'll turn back to the uh to the mover. Well, I think I've I think I've made the point that uh things have changed. Uh we see letters here from concerned citizens. I think if you talk to people and I have talked to quite a few people over the last few weeks who have been adamant that we remove the flag. Um my my argument uh as I made it earlier in this process um may may not have as much support as it did at the time. And so, as I said, I'm I'm willing to backtrack on that and say at least for the foreseeable future or at least until council decides that it's worthwhile to uh put that flag back up there again that that we remove it.

Second. Thank you, Mayor. I won't motivate one way or the other this time, but may I pose a question through staff, please? Uh staff, my recollection that flags at these locations are seasonal. And when would those flags be coming down? Oh, Miss Judson, please. Um, so the flag displays are in place each year from May to October. I know that sounds like a question, but that's it. Thank you. So, I'm sitting here with the understanding that the flags will come down October 1st. Does that seem uh reasonable? Thank you. Uh, with that in mind, um, I I don't know. I don't know what day of the week October 1st is, but it's it's coming down probably before we're finished this discussion, I think. Um, I'm not I'm not inclined to see us enter a more wholesome debate on this subject matter and perhaps that would also satisfy councelor Novak knowing that they come down seasonally and that a new council will have the opportunity to make a decision on this next spring.

Thank you. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I'll look to call the question. Those in favor opposed, sorry, councelor Duncan, councelor Gette, myself, councelor Renul, councelor O'Keefe, and councelor Duck opposed. The motion is defeated. Thank you. We are now turning to the mayor's report that was moved uh during approval of the agenda to be the last item this evening. Uh the first item uh there are three items under mayor's report. 10A is the council uh cancellation of a special council meeting on October 5th and I so move that the special council meeting on October 5th 2026 be cancelled. Second any discussion hearing none all in favor that carries unanimous. Thank you. And item 10B is a time uh that u I lasted four years ago. And interestingly, the two uh individuals that were departing from council and I was uh fortunate privilege to have the uh uh the honor to uh to acknowledge are in the room this evening. Uh but we have two of our dear colleagues who are uh vindicated that they are not running to serve uh uh in

the next term. And I will first want to turn to uh to councelor Duncan who has served uh eight years on council. Thank you for your service. Uh we know that uh the public views uh our meetings here in the council chamber uh throughout the year, but um perhaps not as well understood uh by members of the public is that each year um at the inaugural meeting in uh in December. uh all of us are appointed to to three or four additional appointments uh which can be fairly significant and uh uh councelor Duncan has served uh a number of appointments. Uh she served as our representative to the CRD regional water supply commission for eight years. uh in your uh update report you indicated some of the significant work that is uh that has occurred under the regional uh water supply commission that is the uh implementation of DCC's but I think even more significant is uh in 2025 uh that body uh with councelor Duncan as our representative for Sydney uh approved a uh uh the CRD regional water

supply strategic plan uh which is a long-term plan that has uh uh goals uh over the midterm over the next 5 to 10 years but has long-term planning uh a long-term planning horizon of 30 years uh to uh 2055. It was uh a process uh that was uh first started uh the update to this plan in in 2017. Uh and the work is considerable and um we appreciate uh councelor Duncan how you've served diligently and and there's certainly been continuity from Sydney's perspective on the regional water supply commission. Um, also which is is related is is councelor Duncan served four years, two years last term and two years this term on both the uh CRD subregional sanage peninsula water commission and wastewater commission. And again while we do get our our drinking water from the regional supply commission from from the reservoir. Uh these subregional commissions are important uh for both water and wastewater on the peninsula.

Um the wastewater facility was established in the 1990s and uh there have been significant capital projects and and significant initiatives uh moving forward uh in both of those services. Thank you for serving uh on those bodies. Uh also served four years uh last term on the CRD climate action uh task force uh which is a bit self-evident in in the title of it. Uh we appreciate your your uh your input there. uh you served as leaison to the peninsula streams uh and shorelines uh organization for four years and you also served uh four years uh two years last term and two years this term as uh our council lays on to the Sydney business improvement uh area. So, thank you so much, Councelor Duncan, for your service uh in all of those areas in addition to all of the work we do here at council meetings and committee to hold meetings.

It's it's much appreciated. And please join me in thanking councelor Duncan. [applause] Councelor Duncan, would you like to say a few words? Yeah, thanks. Um I just I want to thank I guess the people who introduced me to the world of local politics from initially joining um the Sydney Community Association and that's where I met many of you for the first time and we used to spend many hours speaking about the local government and what was going on and sitting in that uh in those seats for many years before we got here. Um, and the learning process along the way once I got to to speak to other politicians and and running the first time was really fun. Getting to knock on people's doors and ask them and get to meet all the people in my community um and have an excuse to pick the brains of all the other politicians. Um I know that there is good continuity in this uh municipality for people who've been around um and who understand what's going on and um who've you know there are still people who are going to be new

and running who have still who've done the same thing. They've come on their own and sat in the chamber um every day or you know tried to to join different commissions and we've got other members who've done so. So I think uh I think we'll be in goodstead going forward. Um, thanks to my babysitter who looked after my children for all [laughter] that time. Um, my my boss who gave me a job with the flexibility that allowed me to to do these extra committee works. Um, and of course my first spouse and my second spouse who spanned my two terms and had to put up with me in in in government. Um, my children are very much looking forward to me being back at home again [laughter] on Monday nights.

Maybe not for me cooking the dinner, but for me being home. So, thank you all and uh good luck to everyone who is running and to staff in the the next term. Thank you so much, Councelor Duncan. I'll I'll next turn to Council Renul. Uh, councelor Tulle has also served eight years uh on council uh and it's been a pleasure to to work with you. Uh congratulations on your on your service and thank you for your service to the community. Uh again uh in apart from the work that we do around council uh council has sat on the board of crest and I sat on the board of crest in 2008 and I think it's the capital regional emergency services telecommunications uh committee one of the longest handles of of organizations in the uh in the region but Crest is a very significant organization and very significant things have occurred at Crest uh over the last eight years. Um Crest is a is an organization with a board and council has been our representative representing Sydney on that board and the significant operating

and capital decisions that they have taken. Uh and I think there are um uh there are at least two or three significant uh well at least three significant uh changes and council in Tul as well as sitting on the board also served on an executive committee and I believe there was another committee that you sat on uh on an interimm basis and so uh while it's an addition while it's additional work uh based on experience and interest uh uh members of our council can serve in additional roles even with these external organizations and I know it's very much appreciated uh by these uh by these regional organizations. The three significant achievement achievements for Crest uh were the opening the grand opening of the new uh Crest community safety building in Langford uh earlier this year. I believe it was in May. that was a capital project in the 20 to$25 million uh range and had been a project um I think a gleam in in someone's eye

uh many many years ago and and and took many years to to bring to fruition. It's it's an amazing building um and u I know there was a lot of work on the part of the board uh and staff to to bring that forward. A second um a second significant achievement was uh going to new uh telecommunications uh technology uh which is a very complex process. When I was sitting on the crest board in 208 and 209 the earlier technology was not working as well as it uh as was expected uh p primarily in the second and third levels of underground parades where uh there was just too much uh concrete. uh and we didn't have enough repeater stations uh throughout the region. Uh and now, for example, we have a repeater station in our very own community safety building uh here in Sydney. So, a lot of work to uh to bring the new technology on board and uh by all accounts, it's been a it's been an important success.

Uh and the third is that um uh there was a very long serving uh general manager of uh of Crest Gourd Horth uh was there when I was serving on the board 16 years ago and and uh recently retired. Was it this year? This year uh that Mr. Horth retired. Uh just a very small staff at Crest uh but very very specialized. uh and that transition to another general manager was was an important transition that uh that council run was was involved in. So other appointments uh that uh council has served well. He served well or served four years two years last term and two years this term on the memorial park society board. Uh as many know council is the former executive director of the uh of the Mary Winspair Center. Uh and I think that was a very appropriate uh appointment. U in terms of the connection between the town, the long-standing connection between the town and Memorial Park Society. Uh council served four years uh

last term as on the panorama rec Recreation Commission and served as my alternate for these past four years and probably attended more meetings than I was able to uh on my behalf to the commission. Uh a lot has occurred at Panorama Rec Commission over the last eight years. uh it operating operating annual operating budget in is in the 10 to12 million range. Uh its fiveyear capital plan is in excess of $15 million and uh as we know from processes that involve Sydney uh there were other capital single capital projects that were very significant uh as well. So thank you your for your service to those bodies. Uh, Councilman Till served uh on the VA consultative committee for four years uh last term and and Councilman Tulle also served on the board of of the VAAA uh prior to uh to coming to Sydney Council and uh again I think there was important linkages between our council and the VAAA uh on that body. So serving

four years on APC advisory planning commissioner as our relant to that body, two years last term and two years this term provided important continuity uh over the two terms and while I had served for six years as our representative on the greater Victoria Labor Relations Association uh in taking on additional role at the CRD. Council Tulle kindly served uh on that body for the past two years and they underwent substantial change such that their entire governance model has changed. in recent months. So, Councilman Tulle, thank you for all of those contributions uh to both the Sydney community here locally and and across the region in many different capacities. Would you uh please join me in in uh thanking councelor?

[applause] Would you like to say a few words, sir? How could I not? Thank you. Thank you, mayor. I I would just like to start by expressing my appreciation to my family and and my employer for giving me the uh the latitude to be able to do this because as noted it is it's more than just the Monday night uh meetings and um um I appreciate the the trust that they've shown in me to be able to fulfill this role and u to the residents of Sydney for giving me the opportunity. I've enjoyed it. Um, I I appreciate the the u faith that they've shown in me to serve in this capacity. Um, made all that much easier, frankly, just by the good work that the town staff do. And and I think one of the most important things that we've done as a council is to sort of guide the transition between Mr. Humble's retirement uh and Mr.

Edwards coming into the role. Um, and and certainly enjoyed the opportunity to work with Mr. Edwards. Um, but long-standing the team that's here. Um, I really appreciate the work that you've done and your patience that you've shown with people like myself. So, so thank you. Um, and to my colleagues, um, I probably owe each of you an apology at some point over my eight years. Um, thanks for your patience with me and, um, know that, uh, sincerely I've enjoyed the opportunity to get to know all of you and to work with each of you. And u I think what's been most important to me over the eight years is that clearly u we don't all agree on every course of action and every direction that's right uh for the town of Sydney, but I think we all come from our various perspectives and and clearly we want what is best for this community. And um what has been so nice is to be able to have those discussions u for folks to

see me moan and groan and stretch and yawn and then do know that I left the room uh on each and every occasion feeling that um even if I [clears throat] lost a battle or I won a battle, I still had a good rapport with the people up here. Uh it's that respect that we've shown to one another around this table. And part of that is coming to meetings prepared and and willing to um openly have these discussions and debates and the people around this table have done that as have the two uh former counselors that I I worked with. I had the good pleasure of working with. So my appreciation uh to each of you for that opportunity. And and I guess when you're in this role, you know when it's time to step aside. I know it's time because for the first time in eight years, I prepared my notes. I I'm going to blame councelor O'Keefe uh influence on me for uh for

having done that. So, it's definitely time for me to to step away if council is rubbing off on you. Yes. Time for me to go. The acrylic barriers are in storage. [laughter] You're right. So, thank you. And if you'll please permit me one further indulgence. Um, I've been asked u by by staff and I'm I'm really happy to be able to do this um to be able just to acknowledge on behalf of staff and council uh our appreciation for the role of Mayor McNeel Smith, not just in these past two terms, but previously as a member of of council, how you have done this as a as a father, a partner at home, a husband, and a local business owner, and the amount of time that you have put into uh not just your role as mayor, but all of the external roles that you have filled uh during those years of service to the town of Sydney um is beyond me. Um I know that uh it's a sacrifice. Uh I think it's one that you have done. Um, it's a burden that you have worn very

well. Uh, because I think you love it and you love this community and and you it it shows it shows in your patience around this table when you're dealing with each of us. It shows in your openness and willingness to be um approachable and to receive our feedback um at all days of week uh including the weekends and conversations and the time that you put in. Um it it truly can't be overestimated. um the amount that you have given to the well-being of this community, Cliff. And I'll just say thank you on behalf of everyone. And I'll I'll I'll race through this. Not that I'm trying to do it to discredit, but but the mayor made note of of councelor Duncan's uh external uh contributions as well as mine on behalf of the town. But uh the mayor's list is is is long. Um he participated on the uh ball facility liaison committee, the CRD the housing uh corporation board, the um CRD's hospital district board where he was also an acting chair, uh CRD's governance committee, uh hospitals and

housing committee at the CRD, uh the Peninsula Recreation Commission, as he noted, the CRD's performing arts facilities select committee, the CRD Planning and Protective Services Committee is chair, the CRD regional arts facilities select committee, the CRD regional parks committee as chair, the CRD sanage wastewater and wastewater commissions, the CRD traffic safety commission, the CRD transportation committee. He's been a first nations liaison. He has participated in the Greater Victoria Coalition to End Homelessness, the Greater Victoria Labor Relations Association, the Integrated Police Unit Regional Governance Council, the Municipal Insurance Association of British Columbia, the Official Community Plan Review Advisory Committee, uh South Island Prosperity Partnership uh Partners Committee, the South Island Reconciliation Advisory Committee, and most recently, as we all know, uh not only as the mayor of our town, but as the the chair of the capital region district. Uh it's a it's a long list and each of these external appointments as as we know up here require a tremendous amount of preparation time let alone traveling to get to all of those

meetings let alone uh participating at those meetings. and Mayor McNeel Smith, you you come to your meetings well prepared to participate. Somehow you do that while you're chairing those meetings at the same time. It is a skill uh I think that you've mastered. Um you will be missed in this role. Uh but not in the community because I know with your business and your family here that you are will continue to be a fixture and on behalf of my colleagues our appreciation. Thank you. [applause] Thank you very much, Councilman Tulle, to my to my colleagues on council and and to uh to all of staff. It's been it's truly been an honor and I I I do have some prepared remarks, but thank you. It's it's it's very touching to to hear those kind words and those things that I was involved, I didn't do all at the same time.

uh such as the other council appointments that we've had is is uh you know this one occurs for this at this time period and so on. But uh thank you very much. It's it's been a wonderful engagement with not only the local community but on a regional on a regional basis. I would now like to provide some remarks to my council colleagues to town staff and to the Sydney community at large after having the honor of serving as mayor for the past eight years. In my inaugural speech in the fall of 2018, I spoke about something my family and I had felt ever since we moved to Sydney in 2001. A profound sense of place. Over the years, we discovered that this feeling was shared by so many others we met in the community. A deep connection to Sydney as a community where people choose to live, work, raise their families, retire, and quite simply enjoy life. When we reflect on our sense of place here in Sydney, we recognize a

story that begins long before the first Sydney town site was mapped out in 1891. We are incredibly fortunate to live in a community shaped by the enduring presence, culture, and wisdom of the Wasish people. For thousands of years, generations before written history, the Wasish people have understood and stewarded these lands and waters, maintaining a connection to this place that is deeply deeply rooted in their culture. Reconciliation is is not a milestone that any single council, mayor, or even generation can or should expect to complete. It is an ongoing journey uh grounded in relationships and sustained by our willingness to listen, to learn, and to act with respect. What I've come to appreciate even more deeply during my time as mayor is just how important a strong sense of place, a strong sense of belonging is to a community. Perhaps we came to appreciate that more during the pandemic and in the years since. Or perhaps it has become even more important to us as we navigate increasingly uncertain times and so much

change in the world around us. Whatever the reason, one thing is clear. We care deeply about the character of this place we call Sydney we call home. We care about what makes our community unique, what brings us together, and what makes us proud to belong here. Local government touches many aspects of our daily lives. It does so directly through the wide range of services town staff provide and and the initiatives council chooses to prioritize and indirectly through the partnerships we build and the support we provide to so many community organizations. The choices we make can shape how people experience their community, how they feel about the place they call home, their connection to it, and their sense of belonging.

I want to offer my heartfelt gratitude to many who contribute to our Sydney community. As much as I would like to recognize people and organizations individually, there simply isn't time to do that properly. And if I were to name some, I would inevitably leave many others out. I want to begin by recognizing the volunteers in our community. There are so many of them. They serve on boards, support at community events, help seniors, coach our children, care for our parks and our natural environment, raise money for important qu causes, and quietly do countless things that make our community stronger. More often than not, the contributions happen without recognition or fanfare. But if we were to remove all that volunteers contribute, we would see immediately just how much our community depends on their generosity, their time, and their care.

Volunteering certainly has its own personal rewards, but it impacts its impact reaches far beyond the individual. It strengthens the connections between us and contributes enormously to the strong sense of place and belonging that makes our community what it is. I also want to express my gratitude to the many community organizations, their dedicated staff, and the countless volunteers who support them. our cultural organizations, service clubs, sports groups, arts organizations, business associations, charities, churches, environmental groups, and so many others all play an important role in bringing people together. They create connections, support those who are most vulnerable and less fortunate in our community, and enrich the quality of life for so many of us. In doing so, they contributed enormously to the character of our community and to that strong sense of place and belonging that we value so deeply. Over my 25 years in the community, successive councils have provided significant taxpayer support to both new and existing community organizations.

Despite occasional setbacks, our social, cultural, econ, and economic vibrancy have evolved to a remarkable level, particularly in our recovery from the pandemic. This pro progress stands as a testament to our collective strength, our resilience, and our deep sense of place. I want to express my sincere gratitude to all town of Sydney staff. Mayor and council set strategic priorities and provide direction through the wide range of matters that come before council. But it is town staff who tune those decisions and directions into action and ultimately into results and progress for our community. Day in and day out, I have witnessed the remarkable professionalism, dedication, care that our staff bring to their work. Whether providing roundthe-clock protective services, maintaining our infrastructure, development services, planning for our community's long-term growth, along with managing our finances, engaging with residents, and supporting council. The work you do is vital. I also want to specifically thank you for the support you've provided to me and my responsibilities as mayor and to council as a whole. Your expertise, experience, perspective, and considered recommendations help make in help us

make informed decisions and better serve the people in Sydney. All the work you do is fundamental to creating a community that is safe, well-run, responsive, and livable. Your commitment is deeply appreciated. I want to thank my council colleagues for your commitment and dedication to serving the community. Our citizens observe us doing our municipal business in this chamber throughout the year and each of you allocate substantial time for meeting preparation which is important as I touched on while acknowledging councelor Duncan and Rul. Perhaps less well known is that each member of council also serves on another three to four appointments to various organizations locally subregionally on the peninsula and regionally across the CRD. Some of those appointments are serving on the boards or commissions of organizations providing vital and important services to large service areas that include Sydney. Other appointments are liaison roles with many of the larger or community local community organizations. I commend you for your commitment all of you to serving on those external bodies and your dedication.

While our decisions in this chamber are not always unanimous and nor should they be, we have all been working towards a better community, a vibrant community socially, economically, and culturally. A community that is more resilient, sustainable, and balanced. I appreciate the respect we have shown each other and the community we re we serve. I want to give sincere thanks to the citizens of Sydney. We cannot do our work well without your input, your ideas, and your willingness to be part of the conversation. We know there can be and often are different views on any given matter. Those conversations aren't always easy and they shouldn't always be easy. When people care deeply about their community and are willing to bring forward different perspectives, it challenges us to listen to think carefully and ultimately to make better decisions.

I want to give sincere uh sorry I um some of us uh are passing on the torch to colleagues among us who will continue and to new repres and to new representatives elected in the coming weeks. I wish the new mayor and council every success in serving our community in advancing the vision and our official community plan and supported with other major plans. And in closing, I want to extend my sincere thanks to everyone who encouraged and encouraged and supported my journey in elected office. I'm deeply grateful to my wife and family for their unwavering support that made my commitment possible. It's been an absolute honor and privilege to serve as your mayor over the last eight years.

Thank you very much. [applause] Thank you again. And we're only one minute shy of a motion to extend the meeting, which we won't get to this evening. I would look for a motion to adjurnn, please. Yes, councelor No, please. If I may, just for 30 seconds, please. Um, thank you for your your warm uh departure speech and the accolades heaped upon councelor Renul and Councelor Duncan. But there are four other counselors in the room who uh for whom it is by no means certain that they will be here uh following the election. I'd like to think we all will. But again, it's by no means certain. And so I for one, and I don't want to speak on behalf of my colleagues, but if if they wish, I certainly will. I would like to take a moment to thank my colleagues here for uh a wonderful four years as a counselor. Uh it has been an amazing experience for a guy who's worked all over the world and have done amazing things in his lifetime and has very few

regrets if any. This has certainly been one of the highlights of of my career. It's been a pleasure to work with such committed, dedicated people. It's a pleasure to live in a community where there are people who are willing to give so much to make the community a better place. And of course, uh my experience in working with the staff has been nothing short of exemplary. I think uh they are all extremely dedicated and uh I I could not imagine doing this job without their support. Uh I don't need to go any further but again I hope to see many of you here in four weeks but if not it's been a slice guys.

Thank you. Thank you councelor Novik. I'll turn the floor to any others who may wish to speak. Thank you. A motion or councelor just just very briefly. Um motion to extend the meeting. Yeah. Second. I have I just have a few notes. Just a second. [laughter] Just just a second. We do have a motion to extend. We have a seconder and I know how this vote is going to go. [laughter] All in favor? opposed. I was gonna say the motion carries. No, I just just briefly uh yeah, personal thank you to to you, mayor, for all your years of service. Um express my gratitude to thank to to staff and you're so patient. Like for the people out there, you don't see the questions that staff get from me prior to meetings. and uh um yeah they uh they're very patient and understanding and provide a lot of good information. Thank you for that. my colleagues. You know what I think is has been um really great

for me is you hear about uh councils throughout the province that are have difficulty getting along or there's there's issues and I've appreciated so much working with every every single one of you and as colleagues have said is we have some really uh spirited discussions and I'm sure we all go home some nights and thinking, "Ah, that didn't go the way I want it." Or you feel frustrated. Um, but you know what? We just that gets kind of shrugged off and we come back here next Monday and um we continue to work together. So, I've appreciated all all of you for your professionalism, uh, for your patience and and your dedication to the community as well.

Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Keefe. I'm not seeing any further speakers. Move a journ. Second. We have a second. All in favor? Unanimous. We are adjourned. Thank you so much everyone. Good evening. [applause]