Good morning everyone. Uh welcome to our council meeting for Tuesday, June the
23rd. Uh beginning with our land acknowledgement. In a spirit of respect,
reciprocity and truth, we honor and acknowledge the Mitus and the
traditional treaty 7 territory and oral practices of the Blapoot Confederacy,
Sika, Kaii, Picani, Leal, Nakota nations, Chinuki, Bearspaw, Good Stony,
and Sutina nation. We acknowledge that this territory is home to the Matei
government of the Matei Nation with Alberta District 4. And finally, we
acknowledge all nations, indigenous and non who live, work, and play on this
land and who honor and celebrate this territory. This sacred gathering place
provides us with an opportunity to engage in and demonstrate leadership on
reconciliation and we are honored to have you join us on Treaty7 territory.
Going to the approval of the agenda first looking to administration. Are
there any additions uh to the agenda from administration? [snorts]
Seeing none, looking to count Oh, sorry, Mr. Edney.
» Yeah, good morning council. Thank you, Mayor Dean. I'd like to request an
addition to the agenda under item 10.4.3 CRCA facility improvement funding.
» So 10.4.3. Thank you.
» Thank you. Uh council, any other additions to the
agenda? >> [snorts]
» Seeing none, uh, can I have a counselor make the motion to approve the agenda as
amended, please? Councelor Randawa. Thank you, your worship. Good morning,
everyone. I move that the council approve the June 23rd, 2026 regular
meeting of council agenda as amended. Add agenda item 10.4.3
CRCA facility improvemental. >> Thank you. comments, questions from
council. Call for the vote
[snorts] and that's carried unanimously. Thank
you. We have a number of uh recognitions and announcements today. First of all,
uh you may notice that uh council's wearing a little bit more western style
wear today. Uh we are it's our last meeting before going into stampede and
stampede uh we have learned uh since being in this position is a very busy
time for politicians. Uh there is a lot of networking uh and meetings that
happen uh throughout the time. There's also a time of celebration. Uh one of
the events that the city of Chester is currently heavily involved in the
organization of uh is on July the 9th. Uh we will be gathering with uh members
from across the regional round table. Uh a number of elected officials will be
there as well as some [clears throat] other uh interested stakeholders. Uh but
yeah, Stampede certainly gives us the opportunity to connect with uh ministers
uh and elected officials from both the federal government and the provincial
government as well as colleagues uh from across the province. And so uh it's a
busy busy week. I know that all of our councils starting on July 1st with
Canada Day uh right up until July the 9th uh have multiple events uh each day.
uh and there are some days where we have to take a bit of a divide and conquer
approach uh because there are so many opportunities for us to uh have the
chance to go and network within the city of Calgary. So, it's going to be a very
uh very busy couple of weeks here of advocacy for the city of Chester as we
engage with our uh other elected officials. Also, today we have the
passing of the torch. Uh, Deputy Mayor Nyan has done an incredible job over the
last 8 months, as uh we know at our organizational meeting, we uh have made
the decision that every 8 months or so uh we will transition our deputy mayor.
That way, each counselor has the opportunity to be uh deputy mayor. And
so today, uh deputy mayor Nion uh will now be counselor Nion. And uh and now we
will have uh deputy mayor Schindler. So, Deputy Mayor Schindler will take over
now uh for uh the next uh eight months as Deputy Mayor, and you can all start
your little uh bidding polls now as to how many times Mayor Dean messes that up
today. Uh as now he has to remember to call on Deputy Mayor Schindler and not
Deputy Mayor Nion. Or also, we can place some bets on how many times if I just
say Deputy Mayor if Councelor Nion touches his mic. Uh, but I do want to
say a sincere thank you to uh, Deputy Mayor uh, Nion uh, for uh, his time as
deputy mayor and now passing the torch over to uh, deputy mayor Schindler uh,
who will be taking on the deputy mayor responsibilities. Uh, item 3.2, we have
a public art display. Uh, and I'm looking for her, but I don't see her in
the room right now. So, I will come back to that one. Uh, the next one that I
have is Canada Day. Uh so Canada Day is coming up and we're uh very excited
about Canada Day. It's a big uh tradition uh across Canada, but
especially uh here in Chester. Uh we have a number of events that are going
on uh including council will be out uh serving pancakes and uh interacting with
the public on that day. Uh there is a free pancake breakfast uh for the first
2,000 guests. Uh it is incredible how many pancakes and sausages uh we end up
uh serving at the pancake breakfast. So uh pancake breakfast for the first 2,000
guests. Uh it is on July the 1st at John Peak Park uh starting at 9:00 a.m. and
goes uh through the evening. Lots of free activities uh and things to do.
There's going to be live music. There's stage performances. There's carnival
games, kids activities, face painting, a petting zoo, wagon rides, artisan vendor
market, food trucks. Uh there's going to be no shortage of things to do
throughout the day for Canada Day. It is Canada's
159th birthday on July the 1st. So Canada's 159th birthday and then the day
is going to conclude uh with a fireworks show at 10:45. Uh one of the things that
we wanted to make mention of uh is uh there will be uh both some road closures
and uh some parking um mitigation strategies uh that will be employed
[snorts] uh because parking is limited in that area. So, we are going to have a
shuttle that will be running uh throughout the afternoon and the
evening. And we want to encourage people to walk, bike, uh carpool, and use the
shuttle. And to talk about uh parking and shuttle and all of the organization
of those things, uh we have Miss Christy Jensen who is uh our events coordinator
coming up to present on this uh right now. And I do believe that this is her
first time presenting for council. Uh and what an incredible opportunity as we
celebrate uh one of the signature events here in the city of Chester. So good
morning. >> Good morning council. Thank you mayor.
Uh yes as we know the events that happen in John Peak Park do pose some parking
limitations. And to help our residents enjoy a wonderful Canada Day, we have
prov we are providing shuttle services from two of our uh school areas. Uh both
the East Lake School and the Our Lady of Wisdom School will run shuttles from 300
p.m. to about 11:30 p.m. rotating about every 30 minutes. Um so
you can park in those areas and come on down to John Peak Park because the park
uh the roads uh into the park will be closed. Marina Drive and Chester Station
Way uh will be closed to allow for our vendors and for pedestrians and
residents to enjoy the space uh more safely. So, we encourage all residents
to use our free shuttle service. Uh and again, it'll be at the East Lake School
area pickup and the drop off will be right on Main Street here. Um, so if you
have any questions or need more details, please go to our website uh our chestir
website and um on Facebook, we'll be communicating this out to residents too
to remind them um to to come on down to the park and yeah, hopefully enjoy the
day. >> Great. Thank you. You know, now that
we've got her on the hot seat council council though, is there any questions
or or clarity that you want to ask candidate? Uh councelor Rosenowski, do
you have a question? >> No.
» Oh, okay. I [laughter] would >> uh councelor uh sorry, deputy mayor
Schindler. >> I wanted to catch them. Uh just like are
we serving all the types of uh syrup um at the pancake breakfast? Um and uh and
how many pancakes can people expect uh per person? [laughter]
» Things that will be a mystery until you arrive.
» Great. Thank you. Uh awesome. Thank you so much. Yeah, certainly looking forward
to it. And uh the shuttle uh is something that I believe uh we uh first
added uh last year, but it's exciting to hear that that's coming back and
certainly will be an assistance uh for our events as parking can be very
limited in that area. So awesome. Thank you so much for that. Appreciate it. Uh
so yeah, we just want to invite everybody to come out uh for Canada Day.
The other event uh that we want to draw people's attention to um is on July the
8th at John Pete Park. Uh we're having a large-scale premier pow honoring uh the
legacy of a local Sika youth uh Christian a young man. Uh we're inviting
everyone to come out to this lead by example pow-wow uh to experience the
traditional dancing, drumming, cultural demonstrations and community connection.
Uh we have strategically uh worked with the organizers of this event to have the
pow-wow happening during stampede. Uh and the reason for that is uh there are
a number of dancers and performers that come uh during stampede that are kind of
only really in town uh during that time. And because uh we've now put it during
stampede, they're actually going to be able to come out to Chesameir uh to
participate uh in this pow-wow. So, it's going to be an incredible event that is
on July the 8th. Uh celebrating um again Christian a young man in honor of uh
Christian Young Man, the lead by example pow-wow. Uh the organizers for this are
incredible couple to work with. Uh and very very much looking forward to this
happening uh during stampede on July the 8th at uh John Peak Park. Okay, going
back now. Uh we are looking at the public art display and uh Jen Pedlesson
is here and has brought an entire crew with her uh which is awesome. So I'm not
sure if I'm just calling Jen up or if I'm calling up her crew, but Miss
Pedson, you're taking it away, I believe. [snorts]
Thank you very much, Mayor Dean. And we're very happy to be here uh for uh a
a bit of a mid mid-p presentation opening of the display of the plaques
which we had printed to replace uh for safety reasons the original bronze and
brass plaques that came from the uh summer village of Chester and the town
of Chester. So these were the official plaques that were given to the
municipality at that time. And because we were very worried, as you may know,
these um have been stolen from many many uh uh places that they have been
erected, we wanted to replace them. So we were happy to have received a grant
for uh nearly $4,000 for from the city of Chester to print these in aluminum.
So, we hope that that will not become some uh metal that needs to be ripped
off historic sites. [laughter] So, we hope that will happen. Anyway, we really
appreciated that grant and the fact that we had them. And we also appreciated I
contacted Candace and and we worked with having a display out in the lobby and we
hope that we might have a brief photo opportunity with you people uh outside.
we can um hold them and maybe just take a picture to show our appreciation and
your involvement in helping us with this word of mouth public art. And just so
you know, the aluminum pieces that are to go on top are now out for
manufacture. So we are we are like 80% there. [laughter]
» Great. Thank uh how long is the display up for? Do we know how long we're having
the display up for here at city hall? >> I think it's going to be up Where's
Candice is here. There she is. >> Uh, Miss Dennison, I'll turn it over to
you. >> Yeah.
» We are keeping the display in city hall for at least a month, potentially more.
We'll see what timing works. >> Okay. Thank you.
» Good. >> Great. So, you wanted to do a photo with
council here quick. >> Yes, we wanted to do a really quick
photo op. Um, we were told that might be possible. So, let's go do it.
» Absolutely. So, what we'll do is we'll take a quick recess and we'll come back
at 9:25 uh to provide an opportunity for uh council to go out with the Ches
Historical uh foundation to do this photo.
» Thank you so much. >> Thank you.
Great. Thank you. Okay. Uh we're just finishing up our uh council recognitions
and announcements. Uh and I'm now going to be turning to uh Councelor Nion uh
because councelor Nion has uh an announcement to make about another event
that is happening uh this Saturday. Councelor and Ray.
» Yes, good morning. Thank you
and also doing various crime prevention initiatives. So, this Saturday from
11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. the members of the police communications committee will
be out in full force uh armed with security screws. So, we'll be putting
security screws on license plate. It'll it's uh of course free for anyone that
wishes to have uh those put on the vehicles. In case you're wondering what
they are, these are special screws uh that we put on your license plates so
that they don't get stolen and you don't want your stolen plates to be used um on
another vehicle that is then used to commit a crime. So, uh we'll be out on
the Safeway parking lot from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Um we'll you'll see a nice
bright tent. So, please uh do stop by and um let us put on a screw um on your
vehicle. I do have another matter and this I'm going to look to you your
worship uh for some direction. Another thing that came out of the police
communications committee uh was uh a request uh to administration
to put out more education when it comes to e scooters. I do understand that this
is something that council is discussion is in discussions right now. But if
there's a way to put some form of education out there for um youth and
families, really anyone um to uh prevent um to educate them and of course prevent
any um any accidents from happening. >> Great. Thank you. I'm going to turn to
uh CEO Edney uh on these two items. The first one I think uh is rather
straightforward I think. Uh so Mr. Eddie, my first question is uh would it
be possible uh through you to our communications team? Uh I believe that
there was a motion that was made at police communications about uh a desire
to see the event on Saturday promoted uh on the city uh social media channels to
uh just raise some awareness. So I'm just wondering uh through you if that's
a matter that administration could just pick up and do or would a further motion
from council be needed. It was just a request from the committee to have that
promoted on our social media channels uh going into Saturday's event and I do
believe that uh councelor and Ryan has all the information that he could
provide uh to administration as needed. Mr. Edney.
» Yeah, through your mayor Dean. Yep. That's something we can do.
» Okay. And no motion needed. You guys can just take care of that.
» Yeah. >> Great. Thank you. On the second one, uh
this is something that we're seeing certainly that I'm seeing uh in a number
of municipalities. I have seen uh specifically I saw Strathmore uh come
out with uh some messaging here uh in the past couple of weeks uh I know that
uh many municipalities across Alberta are talking about and discussing uh e-
scooters right now. So uh Mr. Edney I'm wondering about uh this request that's
coming uh with regards to safety and e- scooters and a educational piece out on
our uh coming from the city. What could that look like? Uh what are
some possibilities with that? Uh how what information could even council Ryan
bring back to uh police communications with regards to this? Mr. Edney.
» Yeah, thanks Mayor Dean through you. Um I think I'd need to talk a bit more with
the team on exactly what we would want to put out. Um I understand the concerns
are of course riding on the sidewalks fast, not stopping at crosswalks, not
wearing helmets, all those kind of things. So, I'd probably want to circle
back with the CPOS's uh potentially and some of the other um staff just to see
what are the problems we're seeing out there, what are the complaints we're
getting, and then we can craft some messaging around that just to remind
people of proper ecooter usage. Okay. Uh
do you think that there is enough time to bring back
I don't think we'd be looking for a full report uh but to bring back an answer to
councelor Ryan's request with this and that it's really not his request. He's
bringing it on behalf of the police communications committee. Do you think
it'd be possible to bring back an answer uh on communication to the July 14th
council meeting?
» Uh Mr. Edney? >> Yeah, we can do that.
» What do you see that looking like? Do we need a motion from council directing
administration? That feels like a bit more of a motion. Uh but how do you see
that playing out, Mr. Edney? >> Yeah, I think a motion would be
appropriate. it's a little bit more um comprehensive than promoting just, you
know, simply reposting or or posting quick information on an event. So, if
you made a motion directing us to bring back some information on how we might
communicate those issues, um we can do that for July 14th.
» Okay. Uh Josh, I'm going to take a swing at an organic motion here. Uh council
direct administration to bring back a response
to the request from the Police Communications Committee
on
communications about ecooter safety
in the city of Chester.
Mr. Edy, how does that fit with you? Uh, sorry. To the July 14th regular meeting
of council.
» Does that work? Uh, councelor and Ryan, you good with that? Okay. Uh, council,
any questions about the wording? Okay. Councelor and Ryan, would you like to
bring that motion? >> Yes. concern Ryan
» as move the council direct administration to bring back a response
to the request from the police communications committee on
communications about ease scooter safety in the city of chastir to the July 14th
2026 regular meeting of council >> thank you uh comments questions from
council call for the vote
» and that's carried unanimously thank you uh just looking to council to see if
we've covered off all the items that uh we had for this morning for recognitions
and announcements. Thank you. With that, uh I believe now
we will move to uh a public input. Uh and so for public
input, I do have uh Mr. Fred Deer who uh has signed up to uh come and bring a
short uh commentary to council here this morning. Uh so because this is a regular
meeting of council and not a gap meeting, which particular item on the
agenda are you speaking to today? >> 10.53.
» 10.53. Give me one second.
» So this is the transitional residential TRR. Awesome. Thank you. Uh could I get
you to take a half a step to your left so that you were speaking into the mic?
Awesome. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.
» Sure. Um, seeing how I did not uh get to speak to most the council members at the
open house uh last week, um I prepared a written letter that outlines uh
basically a full summary of what's gone on with TRR from the first time it was
presented in 2015. Um when it was uh um the application at
that time was uh denied by appeal because of uh things that were not done
through the annexation agreement. And uh uh from there we subsequently
um uh made another application in 219 which it took until uh 2023 to get
conditional approval and then the TRR was finally uh my TRR was finally
approved in 2025. So it was an 11-year process to get this
through and uh it works. We've shown the city how it works, why it works, and
what it was for to promote development in the acreage areas which have been
frozen to development since Chester annexed us in 2009.
So, I'd like to pass out this uh letter to everybody. Hopefully, you'll have
time to uh do it before we come back.
deal with the issues promoting and developing.
» Sorry, just before making commentary, just make sure we go back on the mic so
it's caught. Thank you.
This report outlines the deferred and lost revenue by the city over this
11-year p uh timeline. It's substantial and council needs to look at it. Also,
um this area is one of the most prime areas for development to the city right
now to generate revenues by developing it. And it's time that the uh council
and administration looked at forming some type of a committee to
uh somehow get service extensions from Aspen Mir Road to Paradise uh to up to
Windermir Road which allows for 65 acres readily developable which is uh
it's 32.5 hectares which will generate under section 22 of the OSL levies
almost $14.3 million to service these 65 acres and that is
just a quarter of the revenues and the money that has been lost by ignoring the
north acreage area. So in that submission hopefully you'll
take the time to read my report and uh we'll be back for the open hearing
before second and third reading. Great. Thank you. Um I'm going to turn
to uh Director Chanak. I have a couple of questions. Um
your hat. [snorts] >> Thank you. Uh Director Chanak, I just
have a couple questions about this. Um I try not to step on uh I don't think
you've been ignored. I think we've had multiple meetings. Uh so I I I do push
back a little bit on the language of ignored. Uh we we continue. So, I have
some encouragement on some things here, but I I really I really struggle with
the language that you've been ignored. Uh just knowing how much staff time uh
has been put in, how we continue to work on this, and I don't think a council any
council uh in any circumstance can be held responsible for the actions and
conduct of another council. So, I understand that for you for it's been 11
years. I've sat in this seat for two. This council has sat in this seat for
two. uh and I know the multiple times that I personally have met with you. Uh
and so I don't I don't think you're being ignored to councelor Chanok. Um I
wanted to open up the opportunity for uh there's an idea that uh so one of the
things that I said last week was uh at the public hearing I did make mention
that we may not have 100% buy in from all of the acreage owners. I think that
that comment may have gotten um taken a little bit out of context and so I want
to talk about let's I want to ignore not talk about the other areas right
now. Okay. I want to talk specifically about the north acreage area. So we're
not going to talk about east acreages right now. Although in theory this works
but let's to Fred's concern um I want to talk about just the north acreage areas
just for a moment. If the north acreages, sorry, one
moment. If the north acreages, all of the residents in the north
acreages supported development, could the city
work with the work with the residents or how can you talk about the process of
what it would look like if there was 100% buyin from all of them? Could we
simply, and simply being maybe the wrong word,
but simplistically put, could we just put in an ASP for that area, which would
then essentially move everything forward if there was 100% buyin from all of the
residents in the North Acreage area. Uh because I believe that one of the things
that's held this up is that, but if we have different information that there's
100% support, is that a possibility that we could work on specifically for North
Acrees? uh director Chandio >> through the chair. Thank you for that
question. I was smiling because you you called me councelor Chandio and I was
like woohoo >> did I [laughter]
» sorry. >> Um so on on that note um regarding the
ASP it is council's mandate to consider approve or refuse ASPs.
Administration's job is to prepare ASPs and bring it to council. Uh
as for owner support this is not mandatory.
Uh you can have 10% of the owners supporting an ASP. You can have 100% of
the owners supporting an ASP. You can have 0% of the owners supporting an ASP.
Um but given the powers of givens the powers that have been accorded to
council under the MGA council is the decision-making authority which means
you as council get the authority to say yes or no to any policy documentation
that administration bring forward uh to you. Now with that said uh would it be
good to have 100% of the property owners on board when you're preparing an ASP?
Of course yes. Uh but in all likelihood would you always have 100% of the owners
supporting an ASP? I've never seen that happen. You'll always have someone um
who's not necessarily supporting uh a policy documentation because it doesn't
necessarily go in accordance with their plan of how they want to live their life
and how they want to develop their land. In terms of north acreages, I've seen
properties that are uh big acreages like 10 acre land, 5 acre land, and then
there are parcels that are uh 2 acres uh that have a house on it. uh they're
welldeveloped and I some of them have been um in decent shape which means the
houses are there you don't need to bring them down or anything and in those cases
I doubt any of those owners would support uh a densification ASP because
you know they chose to live on that land because it offered certain level of I
guess comfort uh and was in accordance with their idea of how they wanted to
live. Um now if we go ahead and densify that area or prepare an ASP that
densifies that area those [clears throat] owners might not support
it. On the contrary if someone has a raw piece of land that uh is about 10 acres
that they're sitting on uh they may want to densify uh that land. So you'll never
have what I'm trying to get at is you'll never have 100% of support regardless
either way. Um if you were to prepare an ASP we can do that. Council becomes the
decision-m authority. Uh the residents land owners get to support it get to
oppose it. uh you will never ever um have 100% um I guess support for uh a
policy documentation but uh council ultimately becomes the approving
authority for or uh the authority that sort of prepares and implements policies
for a particular area. That's how the policy that's how the ASP process goes.
» Yeah. I think one of the things that we do as council all the time is uh we make
decisions knowing that I mean we can't put up or take down a stop sign without
100% support in either direction let alone an ASP. Uh however uh I think in a
quick conversation that happened uh just uh previous to this uh there's been an
indication that there may be more support in North Acrees than the city is
aware of right now for development. So that's why I wonder uh if the next
logical step is for for the city to be made aware of the level of support that
is within North Acreages and perhaps specific again to North Acreages um that
maybe that next step is the ASP >> through the chair to the chair I haven't
necessarily seen or spoken to in my time here um
with a lot of members of North Acrees. I was in the open house. Um
something that I heard actually was contrary to uh NASP which was
surrounding we bought this land uh considering that there will not be much
development surrounding us and so we do not want that development is what I'd
heard in the open house. Now um that was a verbal conversation that I had with u
residents in the area. uh that does not necessarily
put me in either direction of taking a uh sort of inclination on whether people
want it or not want it. >> In my time here again I have only I
guess spoken to one or two residents uh or one or two residents have come
forward with the idea of densification. Outside of that I have not seen anyone
come forward with the idea of densification. Now that is not to say
that there aren't other people uh who aren't supportive of in support of this
or there are uh people who aren't who aren't supportive of I just haven't seen
them or met them. Uh nor have I seen any written documentation to say um in
Northreges we are 200 residents and out of these 200 here is a letter uh signed
by 160 residents to say that we are in support of an ASP. Even if we were to
get that we would consider the long-term impact of preparing an ASP. Um and at
that point uh we'll probably bring it to council at which point council can
direct administration whether or not to choose to go ahead with an ASP. Uh
because it is going to require resources. It is going to require time,
effort, money, all of that stuff is going to go into uh that process. Uh but
in my time like I said here, I haven't necessarily seen uh a lot of residents
come forward with that demand or ask for an ASP for that area.
» Okay. Uh Fred, I'm going to call her outside the lines a little bit uh and
just provide you an opportunity for just a quick comment or question that you may
have had there. >> I um I'd like to correct you with well
I'd like to about being ignored. I would say we haven't been heard the city. We
have met with them numerous times in the last decade even 11 12 years now.
» I've met with Mr. uh Such um along with more than two uh members uh discussing
the densification of this area. Mhm. >> I'd also like to point out to them that
there are uh lots in the north acreage area that are not 2 acres and those
people have chosen because they cannot access the TRR and they cannot access
your new DCR which is restrictive in very nature and um they have voiced an
opinion that they don't want development because they can't develop the rules
aren't there for them. one and there's one other person who is a tenant and
he's been boisterous. He's not a land owner, he's a tenant. So, I want you to
get people to make sure that you know that um also the north acreage area
should be quadranted because one quarter of it is ready for servicing. The rest
is going to take a long time. And I believe right now from what I just heard
from Mr. Chunwok um that uh we're just
reinventing this wheel again. >> Uh director Chadak
» through through the chair. Um two points of clarity that I'd like to provide.
Number one is when we plan for areas, we don't specifically plan for one resident
or two residents or five residents of the area. Planning and development uh is
a bigger picture thing. uh which means the city gets to decide or chooses which
pathway does it want to take for a specific area. It is not necessarily to
uh support or not support one or more residents. That can be a consideration
100% but uh when we plan for areas we don't necessarily uh that's not the only
factor you know that one of the residents will get to subdivide their
land. Um at an ASP level, subdivision is uh one part of it. Um the bigger
picture, the bigger part of it is how do we see ourselves 20 years from now? Uh
and what's the vision for that area for 20 years from now?
» Uh do we want to see it developed? Do we not want to see it developed or is it
good in in in the state that it is in? Um is it significant? Is it going to
require significant infrastructure improvements? Do we have the resources?
Do we not have the resources? Does the residents have the resources to be able
to do it? Um those are the considerations that we would have as the
planning authority uh when we are planning for an area. We don't
specifically go for Mr. uh Fred would get his subdivision approval. Uh while
we would want to make that happen, it's not necessarily the only consideration
that we would have when we're planning. It's a bigger much higher level
conversation when we plan uh for areas. Um outside of that, uh Mr. Fred, I have
met with Mr. Fred a few times. Um, I have met with him
um on different occasions, but my only rec and this is not to counter your
argument in any way or form. Um, my recollection of uh meeting with him is
uh I've seen him and I've seen um another gentleman who's from Northreges.
Outside of that, I've only seen members uh who are from East Acreages. So I
haven't seen a lot of again public uh coming in with the idea of preparing an
ASP. Like I said even if public wanted an ASP or residents wanted an ASP that
discretion rests with council. It's not a decision. Now that is not to say that
the residents cannot come forward with a proposal for an ASP. M
» if the residents wanted to create an ASP of their own, they can form a union, a
club, a group and come forward uh with an ASP to council and say council this
is an ASP that we have prepared for this area. This is how we would like to see
develop and if everybody's on board council can consider that ASP. Um ASPs
are not only necessarily prepared by the cities, they're also prepared by
developers or residents or or land owners. So um that opportunity 100%
still exists. Um if residents wanted to come forward and prepare an ASP for
their land for you know a group and if they can demonstrate that XYZ can happen
um I don't think uh I don't want to speak for this council but the council
will have to sort of consider that application um and say yes or no to it
regardless of what the decision is but you'll have to still consider that
application. Um, so that's also an avenue that the residents can exercise
if they choose to have an ASP for that area.
» So, I'm going to bring this back into the lines of public input and I'm going
to make some suggestions. Number one, my first suggestion is uh I don't want to
presuppose a vote, but I would be surprised uh if this goes differently.
Um, we have uh some motions that are coming forward to us later on today as
part of this meeting for us to uh book a public hearing uh for later in July. I
believe the proposed date is July 28th, but I want to be careful because I don't
want to presuppose a vote. Should that vote go and should a public hearing be
booked for July 28th, I would highly encourage you that darn near right after
if that's approved, uh, to provide that letter again via email to legislative
services because then that letter becomes part of public record. I know
that people may or may not like bureaucracy and the way that legislation
works, but council needs to work under legislation because that's what tells us
how we're supposed to work. So absolutely I cannot commit for other
counselors. I will read your letter. I will absolutely take this information
in. If you want this to be a part of public record. Should that motion pass
today, I highly well I don't know if it will pass today, I highly encourage you
to then submit this letter as part of the public hearing process because then
it becomes a matter of public record. Number one. Number two, between now and
then, should that motion pass, I would also further encourage you, the city has
kind of like given you a lot of hints here this morning as to ways that you
could proceed. And if I were a North Acreage owner interested in development,
what I might do between now and the possible public hearing, I cannot
presuppose a vote, and I'm willing to say all this again when it comes to the
time of the voting. have a letter come back that is signed
by as many North acreages as you have if there's an interest in them doing an ASP
because then it gives council a different consideration. Right? So those
are my two recommendations. Uh take and do with them what you will. I also
cannot presuppose how a vote's going to go uh later on today. Uh but I just I
would encourage you to uh think about the um ideas that have been provided by
the city on some paths forward that would follow legislative process.
» Sure. Final comment. >> Okay. Um
we will be back to to deal with this through the public hearing and that will
become public record. >> Perfect.
» Uh for sure. Um, as for an ASP, um, since 2015, we've been told that we
don't need a two an ASP to develop with the property. The TRR was put in place
to avoid that and showed gradual densification
in a hope to be able to stir up even more densification.
That property needs to be developed and the city needs the revenues.
» Thank you. I'm going to cut you off there. You are absolutely right. You do
not You're going to like half my statement, but you're not going to like
the second half. You are absolutely right.
You do not need an ASP to develop. That is absolutely true.
What I am saying is that if you if according to a statement that you made
to me offline, if a 100% of North Acreages is looking at doing that,
a possible easier path to development of the area is an ASP because it is your
opinion that that area needs to be developed. And if you have support of
that within there, I would highly encourage you to bring back the evidence
thereof to this council for council to be able
to make a further informed decision.
» Sorry, I'm going to end the back and forth. Uh I have I don't think I can be
more clear about um providing you a solution. I just this the mayor and
administration just outlined a solution for you. I would say to you
[laughter] with that as you will between now and the possible public hearing that
may be coming.
» Okay. Uh I have received a note from uh administration that there may be
somebody else that is wanting to speak uh as part of public input and I believe
Mr. Colin Gil uh is coming forward with a uh presentation. Mr. Gil,
» good morning. >> Uh my name is Colin Gil. I resigned on
Paradise Road 3 uh 243 059 and I also have a partnership with
uh 243211 and 243229.
So that combines uh total of uh 25 acres of land that I have
I have access to I guess or whichever way you want to put it but you know one
of the things I wanted to appreciate uh I know your comments regards to this. So
we started this in 2023 the TRR there has been a lot of work you know no doubt
about it. I I think the community um just to kind of you guys know but it's
300 I don't know 56 acres of north acreages. That's how big the acreage
property is. 68 owners. So that's 68 owners on Paradise Roadside and Rainbow
Side. And we do know that Rainbow Side is going to take another four or five
years to develop. Right. So we're talking about Paradise Roadside 36
residents. Okay. Out of the 36, we have 32 residents that I'm part of the North
Acreage Unofficial Association group. Okay. So,
that's what it is. So, um just to kind of say that, you know, there's a lot of
comments around um you know, people say wanting development, people don't
wanting development. Again, I I I point out to Soch's uh comment there. It's
it's not everybody that needs to, but it also needs to be, you know, we have
residents that just built a brand new house in the 2 acres. We know that
they're not going to develop. You know, I have a conversation with that, but he
has no problem, but he just, you know, I would I would be the same thing, right?
So, I think that's where it becomes is that we really need to kind of look at
it. ASP. Yes. You know, in 2015, if you pull up your own records, $236,000
it was going to cost for ASP. So that's 2015. Now we're in 2026.
» So just do the numbers. Okay? It's going to be over a half a million dollars.
Okay? And out of that survey, there was only five owners that said no to
development, and they were on the Paradise Acreage side right beside where
I live. and they were here today this morning. So, and majority of those
residents out of the five we bought three of them. Okay. So, only few are
left now, right? So, but I think at the end of the day, we can argue argue who's
going to develop, who's not going to develop unless we do a survey or unless
we do something and say, "Hey, this is what we're doing. Are you in or not?"
» Right? That's that's the one point. And the other point is looking at what do we
do want what we want to what we want out of these acreages. That's the whole
solution, right? Do we want to spend a ASP wait for three years?
We've been waiting since 2023 or 2015 ASP half a million dollars.
What does it cost to put in services from Paradise from Marina all the way
down to Aston Drive? >> Okay. Where's a m what's a what's worth
fastest way to do it? >> Right. And the other one is I think I
don't know if all of you guys know I live there. The traffic is is really
like last you know ask any of the peace officers
120 120 129 kilometers an hour on Paradise Road. He got pulled over.
» Mhm. His daughter was not wearing a seat belt.
129 on Paradise Road and a 50 zone. >> That's only not even a one. There's
multiple ones. And I was trying to get a data from them. Safety is a concern. Now
in the summer, kids are driving their you know, scooters, bicycles on Paradise
Road. Um you know, no lights, right? So aside from safety aspect of things,
aside from development things, what are we going to do? Like how do we want that
street to look like? Mhm. >> That street is like literally coming
into Chester. >> People that come from out of town, they
take that road. >> They missed the main entrance to that,
right? So, you know, I I think that's where my my point is really look at the
numbers, look at what we want to do. I you know it's no no doubt about it that
you guys been working together uh as well as we have been and the recent um
conversation I have few with few counselors was that we
you know um when we look at ASP another part is that you know Mark is not here
but when you guys look at your >> storm water
» I am going to need you to wrap it up >> okay wrap it up just the storm water it
is divided up between two sections as well right So that is what we we're
trying to focus on the top section here. >> Mhm.
» Because we know that uh you know there's 60 55 acres of development land there
and the bottom is on a different section. So so that has to be divided
away. So that's all I had for you guys. >> Thank you. Uh I guess I would just have
the same comment of uh I am not saying that the ASP is the solution. And if
anyone's heard that, I don't know how you heard that cuz I never said it. What
I am saying is that you have said a similar comment that I want to capture
and that is in 2015 it was this and now it's this and now there are less owner
of those owners the city having that whether that be in writing
on signed documents that is like demonstrates that is those addresses any
of those particular things certainly helps in the decision-making process.
Right. And so I don't know how much more clear I can be uh with regards uh to
that. So I'm going to go to council warinowski and then director Chanok and
then we are going to need to move on because we do have a rather packed
agenda today. Uh so uh and this is coming back as a debatable item for
council here later on today. Uh councelor Warzinowski.
» No, thank you Mayor Dean. I was going to reinforce some of the commentary and
what you suggested. What I like about through the chair to you uh Mr. Gil
Colin um you've simplified that there may be an opportunity for a spec
specific group of residents >> and we have one job up here as council
is to represent our residents. If you have a majority of residents that want
to move forward with anything, bring it forward and do it as formally as you
can. I would suggest as the mayor has, do it as formally as you can and let's
find out what the challenges are. um and and then it'll come to council
resolution um as opposed to looking at a greater picture that may be more complex
uh at for example all of the acreages northsoutheast or otherwise whether it's
TRR or or any mechanism um I know as a counselor I'd gladly look at an
opportunity if the majority of residents in a specific area uh would look at that
regardless of what happened over the last 18 years. So I appreciate your your
uh clarification today. Thank you. >> Yeah. Yeah. And yes, and it's providing
that clarification in a form of writing with a signing off thereof of the people
involved. Director Chanok, >> thank you. Uh through chair, um just a
point of clarity, I'm not 100% sure um on the intent of the ASP. If
» Sure. >> If the idea surrounding the ASP is that
it'll make development happen, >> then it doesn't work like that.
» Mh. >> Um ASPs provide an overarching policy
direction on how that area is going to get developed. It does not mean that you
still as a land owner, you still do do not have to go through the process of
reszoning. It does not mean the city is going to install services. You still are
the developer and you'll still as land owner will have to install services.
you'll still have to do the detailed engineering design for any of those
parcels. Um, so ASP, having an ASP or not having an ASP does not necessarily
change the development process. Having an ASP gives you a little bit
more clarity on how that area is going to get developed as a whole. Uh, but it
does not necessarily in any way or form stop development. You can still reszone.
You can still install services. You you'll still have to go through all the
steps regardless of having an ASP or not. The purpose of ASP is only to set
the high level direction of how that area is going to get developed. That is
it. Outside of that, the infrastructure cost, the reasoning, uh the development
cost, subdivision, all of it is still going to be borne by the land owners. Um
and so if the intent of the area is actually to develop a vision for the
sorry intent of the conversation is to actually develop a vision for how that
area is going to get developed then the ASP conversation is a relevant one.
» Um but if the idea is it is going to enable development in any way or form it
is not the intent of the ASP that's not why ASPs are prepared. So I just wanted
to provide that clarity um while this conversation is ongoing. No, thank you.
And that's exactly what I was getting at. I know like one of the things that I
appreciated about you uh the most, director Chanok, is the clarity that you
bring, whether offline or online. Uh and uh the the um
education that you've given me in this role because it's a lot to learn when
you sit in this chair uh for whether you're the mayor or counselors. And so I
appreciate that. Um yeah, I am in no and if that was heard then I apologize for
misrepresenting it. I in no way was suggesting that the ASP then unlocks
development. That is not what I was suggesting in any way, shape or form.
What I was suggesting is it does provide the possibility of clarity for what that
area could look like. And to council Warzinowski's point that if there is a
possibility of separating in a way that the three areas of the acreages if you
will and if that if the majority of North acreages area is looking to go and
looking for clarity as to what an overall plan could look like that's
exactly what I've been getting at for the last 20 minutes uh is that's what I
am suggesting. Absolutely. And I apologize if I if if if there was a
misunderstanding. I certainly did not mean in any way, shape or form that
automatically good, we have an ASP development happens. That is certainly
not what I meant. Uh and so if that was heard by the residents and I apologize
because that's that's not even the process. Uh so thank you for clarifying
that uh director Chand Councelor Warzowski then we do need to move on.
Council Wars. >> Yeah. The only comment I make having
certain properties already serviceable is a game changer for decision-m so
we can't reinforce it enough. Let's get organized, bring it to council, and
let's move forward, especially if there's these sweet spots of development
that that may be feasible for residents who want it. Thank you,
» Mr. G. I'll give you a final comment. >> Final comment. So, yes, thank you for
coming back. My the only point was was looking at the cost and analysis, right?
So my I still believe that this paradise area is
most revenue generating for the city of Chester with less cost involved. That's
all I want to leave it out with because if you look generally throughout
Chesmere where can the city make the most money
or revenue out of it is Paradise Road to my believing. That's all I want to leave
it to you guys. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Appreciate it. Okay. I think we
need a motion here to accept uh the information presented at the public
hearing. Sorry, public input for information. Josh,
[clears throat]
uh can I have a counselor make the following motion, please? Councelor and
Ryan, >> move the council accept the public input
regarding transational rural residential TRR for information.
» Comments, questions from council. Call for the vote.
And that's carried it out. say thank you. Uh going to tackle maybe one or two
here before uh taking our break. Let's uh get the um possible easy ones out of
the way if you will. So uh first of all looking to council if anyone has a uh
need for a declaration of conflict of interest.
Seeing none, uh awards and proclamations. We do have uh one uh
proclamation today uh and that is for Canadian Multiculturalism Day on June
the 27th. Uh so whereas June 27th is Canadian Multiculturalism Day, a day to
recognize and honor the rich cultural diversity inherent in Canada's history
and society that brought us to this day. And whereas this significant day affords
the people of Alberta an opportunity to celebrate the rich cultural mosaic of
the province to recognize the individual contributions from individuals from all
backgrounds and that help strengthen the vitality
and prosperity of our communities. And whereas the city of Chesameir remains
committed to fostering a culture of cooperation, equality, and respect while
recognizing and valuing the contributions of diverse multicultural
groups and communities. And therefore, I, Shannon Dean, mayor of the city of
Chesmir, do hereby proclaim June 27th, 2026 in the city of Chesameir as
Canadian Multiculturism Day. [clears throat]
Okay, with that, uh, can I have council accept the Canadian altruism day
proclamation for information? Councelor Randawa.
» Thank you, your worship. I move that the council accept the Canadian
multiculturalism day proclamation for information.
» Comments, questions from councel. Call for the vote.
That's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh, we now have the minutes from our
June 9th regular meeting of council. Can I have a counselor make a motion to
accept the minutes from the June 9th regular meeting of council, please?
Council Randall. >> Thank you, your chief. I move that the
council approved the June 9, 2026 regular meeting of council minutes as
presented. >> Thank you. Uh, comments, questions from
councel? Call for the vote.
And that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh
and uh looking for a motion to approve the June 16th governance and priorities
uh meeting minutes. Councelor >> Thank you, worship, and good morning. I
actually have an amendment for these minutes.
» Okay. Um, under item 12.1, it's noted councelor Sanbo declared a conflict of
in interest pertaining to agenda item 11.4.
Um, however, I don't see an 11.4.
Yeah. So, I think the 11.4 should read 12.1.
» No, that's what we went into in camera about. So, it's in relation to item 12.1
because that's what we went into in camera about. Uh, councelor
» Thank you, your worship. Um, there was another item that was not in closed
session that was on the agenda. I'm assuming that's what 11.4 was intended
to be, but it maybe just didn't make its way into the minutes. [snorts]
» I'm sorry. Go to leg services. >> Uh, thank you, your worship and through
you to councelor So, just a correction on the declaration on your uh
first concern. So, that's 11.4 is actually pertaining to that actual
agenda item. So that number matches the actual agenda, not the minutes items.
That's why so the minutes are always going to be different numbering than the
agenda when we add different items in. That's where maybe that confusion is
coming from. >> Councelor Uh if I could your
worship through you. Which item is it in the minutes
because your worship I believe that was a facility or uh capital projects update
I believe is where that came out of. Yeah, I think it's I think it's 12.1.
The West Chester Drive roundabout. >> Yeah, it's 12.1. So, on the agenda, it
may have been 11.4 and in the minutes it's 12.1.
» Okay. If Ledge Services is satisfied with that, that's fine. I just want to
make sure that it's uh clear in the minutes why that was declared.
» Okay, we're good then. Okay. Uh Deputy Mayor Schindler.
» Yeah. Uh just just a um pedantic um uh comment. I I see um on here quite a bit
and maybe missed it in the other ones. Uh when we call a recess uh it uh the
note says uh regular meeting of council when in fact this was a governance and
priorities meeting. So I'm just curious if if that uh can be uh adjusted uh
based on the meetings that we're in. Does that make sense?
» Yeah, they're changing it right now. Okay.
[clears throat]
Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, can I have a counselor make
the motion to approve the June 16, 2026 governance and priorities committee
meeting minutes as amended with the noted amendment, please?
» Councelor >> Certainly, your worship. I move that
council approve the June 16th, 2026 governance and priorities committee
meeting minutes as amended. Change the mention of regular meeting of council to
governance and priorities committee. >> Uh, thank you. Comments, questions from
council. call for the vote
and that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh looking to business arising out
of the minutes, I just had a quick question on the followup. Uh we had
approved for me to sign the letter of support uh for uh for the from the
request from Strathmore and we had just said that there was a small change that
needed to be done to the letter looking to administration. I haven't received uh
the letter back yet uh from Mayor Fuel. I'm wondering if administration has
received one and if not if administration would like me to reach
out to the mayor uh or if we'll reach out to Strathmore for the updated. So
just looking to our CEO and LED services to see if we'd receive that up updated
copy of the letter. I'm seeing a shaking of head. Okay. Uh so Mr. Eddie, would
you like me to reach out to Mayor Fuel and ask for the updated copy? Yes. Okay.
So, I will reach out to Mayor Fuel and uh just find out about that. Great.
Thank you.
Okay, with that, I'm going to suggest that we take a uh short 10-minute break.
We'll come back at 10:25. Thanks, everyone.
Good morning everyone. Uh just coming back now to our meeting and now we're
moving on to our next item uh which is item uh 10.1.1 which is the uh chestir
municipal heritage advisory committee recommendations. Uh I am Oh, this is
being presented by Miss Emily White. Uh good morning.
» Uh good morning, Mayor and Council. Um I'm Emily White with Legislative
Services and today I am presenting on behalf of the Chester Municipal Heritage
Advisory Committee. um as they on May 21st they made two recommendations
um to council and they are just looking for these two recommendations to be
considered. Um so the first one is they are just looking to add a couple display
cabinets here at city hall just to display a few artifacts
as to add a little bit of color of this right now is there are a number of
artifacts sitting um and being stored here at city hall. However, they are not
being adequately displayed. Members of the public are not able to view them.
And so the heritage advisory committee is just recommending that we have a
couple cabinets to to be displayed. And in conjunction, we would also work with
the historical foundation. And the second recommendation that came from
this May 21st meeting was uh for council to consider supporting and hosting um a
50-year anniversary event in 2027 that um the heritage advisory committee
would work on. And from the administrative side, we are just looking
for potentially a motion to look into the feasibility of both of these as
there would be some potential cost financial implications and resource
implications. I may also lead on to both of the counselors who sit on this
committee if they have anything further to add um to this report.
» Thank you. I'm going to go to Mr. Edney on this. So there's clearly a budget
implication on the first one. Uh and uh this one to me feels very much like an
administrative process uh in terms of uh well this is admin's work. So how would
you how would you see us uh tackling this one at the moment? I do how would
you see us tackling this one at the moment, Mr. Edney?
» Thank you, Mayor Dean. Um yeah, if council's open to this idea, I'd make
the motion for us to do that. Um, then if we have any budget considerations
that we do need to bring back to council, like i.e. we need to buy these
display cases. I don't know if we have some in the basement or something that
could be repurposed or something that could get donated, but we could go
figure that out and and get this task done and then if there's any budget
considerations, we'll just bring that back as part of our regular process.
» Yeah, I think we've had a strong focus on wanting to celebrate our history.
We've we've talked a lot about the idea of uh strong comm community communities
as they move into their future really build on their past and I I I see this
as playing off of that and I would certainly welcome if uh if any counselor
uh but especially one of the two counselors I believe it's councelor
Grant and councelor who sit on this committee if councelor Grant or
councelor uh want to bring forward a motion uh literally that council
directed administration to consider adding display cabinets It's like just
basically adapt the wording of this. Uh then I think that that uh so looking to
do I have a council that would like to make the following motion. Councelor
Grant. >> Thank you, Mayor Dean. As I was laughing
as Josh slowly dragged the motion across the screen as you were talking. Um I
move that council direct administration to add display cabinets in the lobby of
city hall that will display and identify historical items of significance and
collaborate with the Chester Historical Foundation on the dimensions of the
display cabinet. Uh, Mr. Any, any any concerns with the
wording of the motion? No. Okay. Uh, comments, questions from council,
councelor Randawa. >> Thank you, your worship. I just have one
comment. Um, I love this one. No problem. I will definitely support. Uh,
but for the future, for in not now, but it's for the long term. Don't we the
like we have to consider uh museum? So even on a smaller because I want uh this
history to keep because even anytime um we go to even smaller municipality or
smaller village they always have small museum so their history is there so we
don't have something like that this is um I would love to if administration or
how this have possible for the future I would love to bring this forward. Yes.
Thank you. Uh, councelor >> thank you. Your worship through you. I
can speak to that a little bit as one of the members of the committee. 100,000%.
Yes. Um, so the historical foundation has been doing work related to
historical artifacts and preservation of artifacts for many many years, but the
city's role has been really ad hoc until this committee was put in place. So, it
is a conversation that the committee has had. And some of the steps that um we've
taken towards that include getting an understanding of how the uh digital
management system uh digital asset management system is working to see if
that can uh support some archival information and then also uh we invited
a member of staff who's responsible for that uh function to uh come in come and
let the committee know what is happening at the city. I think the major barrier
right now just with most things is space and cost. Um but it's it's one of the
items on our list of uh what to do. Um the priorities that council has approved
for this committee include um a retention policy for artifacts and that
plays into that. So, as part of that work, that would be um the direction
that the committee was uh intending to make um intending to advise council on
is in the future what that could look like.
» Great. Thank you for that comment. Any other comments, questions from council
with regards to the motion. Call for the vote
and that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh there was a second uh suggestion
was that was in here. council to consider supporting city and hosting
2027 50-y year anniversary event. Uh I would love to see this added as part of
our uh 2027 events calendar. Uh we had we had become a 10-year city uh
last year and uh would have loved to have seen us capitalize on that
opportunity uh to uh celebrate the 10 years. So, uh, with that, uh, us
celebrating a 50-y year anniversary, uh, for the, um, celebrating, uh, the city
of Chesamer, I think would be a fantastic idea and would love to see a
motion, uh, that council direct administration to add, uh, a 50-year
anniversary event to the 2027 events calendar.
So, Josh, if I could have that motion, please.
Thank you. Uh, do I have a counselor that would like to make the following
motion, please? Deputy Mayor Schindler. >> I move that council direct
administration to add a 50-year anniversary event to the 2027 events
calendar. >> Thank you. Uh, comments, questions from
council.
Call for the vote.
Deputy Mayor.
» Thank you. And that's carried unanimously. Thank you.
» Awesome. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Okay. Now moving to item 10.2.1 which is policy 862 creating access and
partnering in recreation policy being presented by Miss Kathy Russell special
projects and Kylie Hoskins manager of corporate facilities and recreation.
Good morning. Good morning. Welcome. Um,
please note that all of my comments shall be made through the CAO to your
worship and all members of council. Um, my presentation will be five minutes or
so. Um, basically I'd like to highlight a few items in the policy and then open
it up for discussion. As background, the policy was originally reviewed by the
recreation committee. We um we had pretty good discussions and then it also
was internally circulated. So we had parallegal and ledge services various
departments providing feedback. It it also went to the CRCA and the golf
course membership group. So there has been several sets of eyes on the policy.
Um the purpose of the policy is to um is to start to think about how as a city
you know having a documented policy so that we can identify our priorities as a
municipality in particular as far as how we work with our partners.
Um hold on just get this.
So the policy provides a clear framework for developing partnerships in a formal
way. It also speaks to a philosophical statement about the importance of
accessibility for recreation because that is a primary role of
municipalities. Um even more so than provinces or the
federal government or any other organization. Municipalities have a very
important role to play in recreation and it provides guidance to ensure that the
city safeguards its investments um and also behaves as a good steward.
The only point I wanted to make about this slide is that this is the first
policy we have and it's fairly broad in some areas. I had done that
intentionally because um you know I suspect that will grow into it and it
will definitely change and be a living document that needs to be updated.
So a few things I wanted to mention about it. Um one is about the comment
here. Municipally owned and partner funded recreation assets cannot be held
for the exclusive use of a specific membership over an extended period of
time. The intention is not to be restrictive but it's intended to convey
the priority that when the public or partners are using municipal assets um
the idea is to promote public participation and you know the public
good um for as many people as possible. So, schedule A or schedule 4 speaks to
examples and there are lots of different examples that uh would apply and at the
bottom it also speaks to the fact that we need to think about the different
types of recreation amenities that are out there. So, a golf course would be
very different than than a recreation facility or a soccer pitch. Um so, we
need to have that flexibility.
The second point is around the reference to the access to recreation as it
relates to the long-term athletic development model which is established
by the Canadian Sport for life society. uh more and more across the country,
clubs, municipalities, different groups are starting to use this as a framework
and it is that it's a really strong framework that speaks to the
developmental um the development of children in
particular the young youth in sport. So it serves as a good model to um kind of
overlay when we're looking at access policies or if we're looking at
scheduling policies or investment approaches that type of thing. So in
spec specifically it speaks to the fact that as a municipality we would be
delivering and supporting at the grassroots stages of development.
um and that at the higher levels which would be national high performance elite
um participation or you know training that we would typically do that in
partnership with other organizations or bodies. Um so it does provide some
clarity but again pretty general about what would our role be and primarily
it's grassroots but it doesn't um not it doesn't exclude any level as long as
like it would really depend on the model that were would were to be involved.
Sorry. Um the next point I wanted to make was about the definition of what I
call social recreation organizations. Um in some case some municipalities
limit their partnerships to nonprofit organizations
and in this case it does not. So for-profit organizations are also
included in the definition and that was done intentionally so that should we be
interested in working with um you know future ICE uh for-profit organizations
that would be open it it gives us the greatest degree of flexibility.
Um and then with respect to leases and license of occupations, there are
several pages dedicated to this topic. Um just as background, what I did in
this area was I Calgary has um hundreds and hundreds of partnership
uh partnerships and they have multiple different departments that interact with
these partner groups. So I spent quite a bit of time talking to different
departments about how do they do it? What are the issues? What lessons have
they learned? So from that I pulled out what I would call the basics and put
that in the document. It didn't include that the policy doesn't include of
course you know the level of detail that would have been included in in um
Calgary's policies.
And then as you saw there are different schedules at the back that reference um
you know different clauses in the policy that are uh provide more detail. So
those are the points that I wanted to raise and bring to your attention and if
there are any other um you know if you have questions or comments I'd pass it
back to the chair. >> Councelor
Thank you your worship through to Mr. Edney and Miss Russell. Thank you for
the presentation for all the work. I know a lot of folks have uh provided
feedback on this. Would you mind discussing a little bit more about what
the feedback was from the parties who reviewed the document? Uh the recreation
committee specifically um uh but also other parties what what was their
feedback and changes or updates to document
» broadly Kathy not itemized. [laughter] Okay, that's a
so with respect to feedback from the recreation committee, um there were
several clauses that were added. Um, for example, in one of the schedules, it
speaks to data collection and the importance of having the opportunity to
develop an agreement whereby we had access to certain data that was also um
obviously recognizing PIPEA and everything that needed to be considered
in terms of um privacy. Um, there were
putting me on the spot here, councilor in terms of the feedback from the
committee. Um, I would open that up to other committee members as well to
provide feedback.
» Thank you, your worship uh through you. Apologies, Miss Russell. Um, so I mean I
having sat in uh most of those meetings um and councelor Grant would have even
more perspective. There was some discussion around the level of detail to
put into the document. Um, and I know for myself, uh, also knowing how this
organization being the city of Chesmmeir and its council tend to operate, we like
really actionable things. And so I appreciated having, um, schedule I want
to say schedule 4 added where it lays out, for example, what agreements would
actually look like with third parties. um but there was some conversation
between um subject matter experts about the level of detail to put into these
documents. So maybe another way of asking on that particular question is
what what is the value of having you know a a more high order framework level
document like this versus something really in-depth as our first document
that we uh approve. >> Well I think there are a couple of
points. One is having the flexibility at this stage is important to have when we
move forward working with partners. The detail will always come in the form of
agreements that we establish with partners or through leases. Um so this
is really an overarching policy that would guide what might go in those
documents. Um the other point is when we think about access to recreation
um it is on a spectrum. So for example um you know as a municipality and most
municipalities in Canada care a lot about grassroots participation and
access for everybody. And so this policy definitely leans towards that as
compared to a heavy emphasis on sport tourism or a heavy emphasis on private
public partnerships which it really doesn't speak to at all. So this is
really what I would call um your f the first policy that matters with respect
to um having consensus amongst council
members about what it means to be doing recreation at the grassroots level and
really uh framing up that accessibility importance.
» Great. Thank you. Uh Mr. I just wanted to confirm something quickly and I have
a couple comments to our CEO with regards to this. Uh, first of all, uh,
can you just confirm that the third party operator for the golf course is a
not forprofit, Mr. Edney?
» Uh, thank you, May. No, they aren't. >> Okay.
» Not right now. >> Because the document says that it it is.
So, the first page of the document says two of the newly acquired properties are
operated by third party nonprofit organizations. And later in the
document, it talks about the golf course being one of those. I did not think that
the golf course was a nonprofit. Not right now. We're operating it in the
spirit of a nonprofit, but it is not technically a nonprofit or profit
entity. >> Thank you. I just want to confirm that.
Um to uh to you, Mr. Edney, and uh Miss Russell, thank you for the presentation.
I appreciate uh the work that has gone on and the collaboration that has been
done with this. Uh there was a statement that was made that um that that it's
broad on purpose uh and may need to be updated. Um my personal feeling and I'm
willing to bring forward a motion as such is that this is too broad uh and
isn't specific enough and I am concerned that it isn't actionable enough. Uh and
I would actually like to see us uh make a motion to send back this particular
item uh to administration. I'm hoping uh to not have to be overly specific in in
terms of uh concerns that I have with that.
the broadness of this and the uh in my opinion feeling it that it's too broad
and so if we were to send it back uh I would like to just send it back to
administration what possibly Mr. Edney uh could that look like Mr. Edney?
» Yeah, thank you Mayor Dean. So, um, you know, as Miss Russell noted, it was
intentionally kept somewhat broad because this is a first crack at
creating this type of of policy document. Um, as I read through it, I
agree there's probably some spaces where it could be a little more prescriptive.
Um when we write a policy especially a
policy um that would be a council policy that policy
should be a guiding document for myself and then the rest of administration to
understand exactly what council is looking for as we move forward through
whatever that is budgeting bylaws etc. Um, so I'm not sure that this,
as you've just pointed out, necessarily captures enough of that. Um, having said
that, I don't have any ideas off the top of my my head as we're talking here
right now, but we could take it back and look for that general approach of making
it a little bit more prescriptive on how we operate knowing what we know right
now going forward. If that makes sense. Yeah, I view this as a first swing uh
but not necessarily a first swing um that I would approve uh in terms of
the first swing. And so that's I I do appreciate the first swing that's been
taken at this uh council.
» Thank you worship uh through you um to Mr. Adne. I think one of the things was
uh because I do serve on that uh on the Iraq committee and uh this particular
policy didn't necessarily come out of a council resolution where we specified as
to how prescriptive it needs to be. Uh so which is why I think you know uh why
it is as broad as it is. So uh I do agree you know some more substance would
be great. However, it's also important that uh we describe how prescriptive we
want it to be. You know, what areas um and what that exercise will look like,
you know, is this, you know, as members of council, we should maybe go through
this policy again and send suggestions to Mr. Adne or, you know, however we do
it. But I think we need to set uh yeah administration for success here by
giving them a bit more substance and guidance as to what exactly it is that
we're looking for. >> Yeah, thank you. I since I was the one
who kind of originally waited into these waters, uh I'll respond to that. What I
would say is uh I would like the policy to meet the goal as described by uh Mr.
Redney that when we have a policy that he as CEO is able to go through his uh
executive leadership team down through his managers down to the rest of the
staff and they have a uh full understanding of how to uh action uh
said policy and our CEO has already said that he doesn't necessarily feel that
this is doing that at the moment. I also fully endorse and appreciate and support
the comment that you made of council providing suggestions. I think it would
be disingenuous disingenuous of us uh to ask this to be sent back but then not
provide some feedback and uh if our CEO is okay with it I'm going to call on our
CEO if it would be okay for council [snorts] to provide specific feedback
and suggestion ideas via email to administration should this be sent back
if he would see that as an appropriate way for us to provide that feedback at
this time. Mr. Edney. >> Yeah, thanks Mardine through you to
council. Yeah, I think that would be greatly helpful to us.
» Okay. >> Then we can incorporate the feedback. I
mean, there are some parts that we're I wouldn't change in here, but there are
some parts that probably we should strengthen up a little bit.
» Um, and then we can bring that back for your input and for your debate um, in
the public setting, but that email would be a great starting point for us.
» Okay. Thank you, Councelor Sambble. >> Thank you, your worship. And I I think
that's a good plan. Consider this first reading like any other bylaw that we
provide a bunch of feedback on. this one's just a policy and doesn't need a
first reading. Um I I am curious how uh that process might affect some of the
other work that we have ongoing. So uh through you to Mr. Edney and then Miss
Russell perhaps or actually this might be a Mr. Edney question. I'm not quite
sure whose portfolio that's in. Um but one of the things we're working on is
trying to get a multi-year funding agreement going with one of our current
thirdparty operators. Um, and in my opinion, having this in place makes it
easier to uh really meaningfully begin or continue that conversation. Is it
possible? Um, I'm not really asking if it's possible. Can we continue those
conversations while the work on this policy also continues?
» In my opinion, uh, through the grant adjudication committee, absolutely, that
can happen. uh and not just through that committee, but uh we're we've already
committed to uh looking at our different funding streams that we have for
recreation that we have for not for-p profofit. Uh and so I don't see it as a
hindrance, but Mr. Edney, >> no, thank you, Mayor Dean. I agree with
you. Yeah, we can continue to move both along. I don't think we would want to,
you know, to councelor Sandbo's point, um approve some sort of multi-year
funding or partnership without this policy in place first. But given what we
all know, I suspect I expect those to move along parallel lines with the same
goals and values. That should shake out of both of those,
I would expect. And I think we can likely get this
policy done before we get those I don't want to use the term
negotiation. That's not really the right term, but before we get those
discussions with the partner completed anyway. So, I think it should still
work. Well, Mr. Enu, would you agree that the multi-year funding piece would
be a part of budget process, which would happen in the fall, and we could look at
even having this come back possibly by end of July? That'd be tight. But if we
had this coming back early September, and then our budgeting process will
start shortly after that, then they they would essentially work directly in
parallel with each other because I don't see a methodology where the multi-year
funding would necessarily be done outside of the budgeting process. Mr.
Yeah, through you to council. That's correct. Um
I know we just approved budget, but we're already in the budget process for
next year, >> right?
» But to your point, to be advanced where it's going to come to council for some
sort of approval isn't going to happen until the fall. So I do agree if we can
get it in by the end of July, we'll shoot for that. But realistically, the
first sort of meeting in September might be a good target for this.
» Great. Thank you, Councelor Grant. >> Thank you, Mayor Dean. um through the
chair to possibly administration or probably more likely council actually.
So I just want to kind of begin with where this policy came from and this
policy is largely being driven from um the purchases that we've made of
recreational land um and that those properties have operators on them. And
right now there is a void in any documentation regarding how we partner
with them, what the values are, when we expect them to come and report to us. um
all those things. So um I completely agree that we can provide some feedback
and some fine-tuning to the policy that will help administration um use it
better um or maybe use it to develop the framework that we're going to use with
these partners better. But I just I wanted to point out that it is important
to do this and and even with our new rec center coming along, we're we're going
to have to to partner possibly if that's the recommendation with a provider and
without us having a document that says what our virtues and what we value is,
we're I don't know what we hold them to at the end of the day. So I just want to
say that I appreciate all the feedback that will come from this and I know
it'll make the document even better. So um thank you Mary Dean.
» Thank you. So then I guess with that suggested organic motion here uh Josh
you could help me out with this would be council direct administration
uh to bring back
uh sorry uh sorry no I'm going to change this council send
policy number
862 uh being the creating access and
partnering record. Yeah, there we go. Yep.
to administration for further review
based on the conversation at the June 23rd
regular meeting of council and to bring back to council
by the end of September 2026.
hopefully shoot for July, but with us having August off, then I think it would
be by end of September. So, Mr. Edney,
are you good with the wording? Okay. Uh, [clears throat] council, any comments or
questions with regards to the wording of the motion?
Deputy Mayor Schindler. >> Uh, uh, so this is this the wording of
this is to, uh, bring back with the review of the conversations. Um, are we
going to should we not include the feedback um that we're going to send via
email? >> No, I I don't think we have to be
prescriptive in how we're doing something. Typically, we're not
prescriptive in the how. >> Okay.
» Right. We've we've said it's based on the conversation. So, that's why that's
in there. And part of that conversation was for us to provide feedback via
email. >> Okay.
» Okay. Do I have a counselor uh that would like um
Do I have a counselor that would like to make the following motion? Councelor
Grant, >> I move that council send back policy 862
being the proposed creating access and partnering and recreation policy to
administration for further review based on the conversations at the June 23rd,
2026 regular meeting of council and to bring back to council by the end of
September 2026. >> Thank you. comments, questions from
council, call for the vote.
And that's Kley. Thank you. Thank [snorts] you. Okay, with that, now we're
going to uh item 10.3.1, which is the graffiti art wall installation
viability, presented by Miss Candace Hennison, director of strategic
services. Good morning. >> Good morning, Mayor and Council.
Uh this report comes forward in response to a council motion which directed
administration to bring a report on the viability of a graffiti wall
installation. To action that motion, we conducted a municipal scan of similar
programs. And what we found is that municipalities pursue graffiti walls for
two reasons. The first is to redirect an existing graffiti problem to give
unauthorized tagging a legal outlet and reduce vandalism in the broader
community. The evidence on whether this works is mixed and some communities have
seen a reduction in illegal activities while others have been candid that they
did not. What I can tell you is that our bylaw enforcement team has not
identified a graffiti problem in Chester. So that rationale doesn't apply
to us and that's a good thing. [sighs and gasps] The second reason
municipalities pu pursue these programs is arts and culture activation, creating
a space for local artistic expression and community engagement. That's the
more relevant lens for Chester and it's where the rest of this report focuses.
What the scan consistently shows is that the programs with the best outcomes, the
ones that lasted, the ones that the community valued, and that avoided
content and governance headaches, all of them had one thing in common, and that
is a committed community partner. So, a youth club, a community association, a
festival organization, but someone who owns the program beyond the initial
installation. We don't have that partner identified
yet. and we think that that would be the first step before any further commitment
is made. So rather than building the city uh building and owning a wall, our
recommendation if council wishes to pursue this opportunity is that
administration be directed to issue an expression of interest to identify
capable and community partner or partners. From there, we'd return to
council with either a program update or funding request depending on what the
city and the community are able to develop together. I'm happy to answer
any questions. >> Uh, councelor War Zowski.
» Thank you, Mayor Dean, and through the chair to you, Miss
Dennison. This has actually been top of mind for me because recently most of
council went up to the FCM conference Demonton a number of weeks ago, and
there's art installations everywhere >> and you are absolutely right. Um,
the first point may not apply to us and I certainly didn't have any commentary
with my peers up there or the city councilors in the city of Edmonton, but
one thing was clear is that these art displays had meaning and had culture. A
lot of them were not word graffiti. So, I appreciate you bringing this forward
to council and all of them definitely had a curator of sorts to take it
forward after the approvals were made through the city of Edmonton. And
culturally, they seemed a lot more impactful than graffiti in my opinion.
I'm not saying graffiti um is something that lacks culture by
any means, but if we found that partner, it would seem and you've you've heard
you've probably seen a question for you is um what I've seen and I I'd like to
see hear your feedback is have you seen any feedback or looked at other
municipalities who had a competition or some type of um with this expression of
interest as you suggest move forward with something that's or culturally
appropriate for what the residents and that winner of the expression of
interest would take forward and maintaining as we move forward. My
question I guess then is is it graffiti or should we extend it past that?
That is a tough answer. Um I would say that what I have informally heard from
the community is that there is a desire for arts and creativity expression. So I
don't know if we would want to scope it down to specifically one method. Uh it
is something I think that is larger. Uh obviously the the motion and the way
that the report was written was more specifically to graffiti since that was
the wording of the original motion. But I do believe that there there may be a
desire to extend beyond that. >> Councelor
» Thank you your worship. Um I would love to respond to that. Uh, for for me, this
one in particular is the graffiti wall. Um, it'd be wonderful if we could have
more public art in general in Chester. Um, I know we have a public art policy.
It's probably out of date because that was like 2015 or something like that, I
remember. Um, however, as a reminder of how this came about, we received a
presentation about how unsafe and bored young people in Chester were were
feeling. And out of that the you safer uh communities working group informal
group got together uh is still now regularly meeting and I had asked the
group what are some recommendations that we could bring to the 2026 budget that
are quick wins for kids in Chester and this was one that we thought hey this
might have some this this might be a good idea because it's cheap we could
probably do it quick and we can ask admin what they think so that's why I
brought this forward to budget um and that's why uh after we made this uh this
motion specific specifically about the graffiti wall. So, if this does go ahead
and we do look for a partner, in my mind, I really do hope that it is
specifically for the graffiti wall because the intent of it was to give
kids something to do in safe places. So, somewhere where maybe there's a camera
or something like that so they can participate in art uh and recreational
activities in a safe way that doesn't cost the city too much. So, that's my
feedback. However, if we wanted to have a conversation about public art and
finding money for public art and grants for public art, that is a separate
conversation that I would also absolutely love to have.
» Thank you. I guess a question that I have uh raised from the commentary from
councelor is Miss Dennison in any of the research that we were doing. So,
you had mentioned uh that uh one was uh dealing with a specific uh graffiti
problem. While we do have graffiti that gets done throughout our community, I'm
not sure. Knock on wood that we have a problem per se. We just have uh we have
situations of it which are uh and we have a couple of areas where in
particular it can not be great. Uh but I don't I don't know if we have a
widespread graffiti everywhere happening hopefully knock on wood not encouraging
that. Uh secondly though um so in your research there was you mentioned that
the second thing you had mentioned was in your research was this idea of uh
public art and uh working with um from a cultural standpoint.
However, uh councelor is absolutely right. This came from the
work of you safe community and then it kind of went through there. In your
research did you see any of our any other municipalities that tackled it
from a youth perspective? There are two that come to mind off the
top of my head. One successful, one not. Uh so the one that was successful was
actually the town of Penhold. And what they have done uh is in a youth area, I
believe it's a skate park, but but a youth recreation area, they did drop uh
cement blocks there specifically for graffiti. So, it was in a very remote
area, highly used, highly visible, and they had a local community group that
would come and just basically reset those blocks with gray
paint uh a couple times a year. And um they have had great success with this.
Very low incidents in terms of like hate speech or inappropriate content on it,
but it it has been uh well utilized. Another one that comes to mind is the
town of Okatokes. Uh they did open up a graffiti wall in their town. Um that
left lasted for less than a year before they shut it down due to those
governance issues, due to hate speech, due to inappropriate content and the
availability of staff resources to continually monitor and reset this
space. they since pivoted their program to um curated arts with local artists uh
in certain areas around the town. So I have seen both kind of both sides of the
spectrum I would say in the research. Uh and without implementing something here
I couldn't obviously tell you what what to expect.
» Okay, great. Thank you. Uh with that then uh what specific motion do we have
here that we are looking at that we could possibly put on the table for
debate? Is there a proposed motion that council can see?
So right now it's just except for information but I think you were looking
for some direction were you not? Okay. Uh so let me look here really quickly.
Uh,
councelor cuz sorry just before that cuz I see one on here that was to
seek a community partner via expression of interest I believe was uh what you
were looking for with regards uh to a motion was the other options.
» So direct administration to issue an EOI for a community organization to lead a
community art wall. So, it sounds to me like this is the idea that we've been
kicking around and um personally would like to see this come forward as a
motion for debate, but uh I have a couple of lights here, but uh councelor
Councelor >> I was prepared to make exactly that
motion if you're ready. Your worship. >> Uh I am. Just give me one second. Deputy
Mayor Schindler. >> Yeah. Um thank you. Just before you make
the motion, so I don't go outside the motion, I just uh want to express my
interest for um the development of a Chesmir Arts
Council um for both theater and and all basically all the other types of arts uh
whether that be most likely be something outside of uh the city's operations. So,
um, and I think that that that group could, uh, certainly run graffiti walls
and other art installations around town, similar to what Okats has, uh, for their
curated, uh, local artists. So, um, I don't know how to do that, but, um, I
just wanted to put that into the into the world and see what happens. Yeah. So
my encouragement on that would be either a prepare a uh notice of motion that I'm
more than happy to work with you on uh to do that and or look at at the
organizational meeting having that become a committee of council and that
that's something that we could launch in October I think are two ways that we
could handle that. Uh and I would support uh supporting you in either of
those whether it be through the notice of motion uh and or creation of that
committee when we get to the organizational meeting in October.
Councelor with the motion please.
Thank you, your worship. Here it is. I move that council direct administration
to issue an expression of interest for community organization to lead a
community art wall with the city's role limited to enabling support and report
back only if a willing and capable partner is identified.
» Uh thank you. Uh comments, questions from council.
[snorts] Councelor Warzinowski.
» Thank you, Mayor Dean. to councelor Sanbo. This this seems a
little bit vague. Only if willing and a capable partner is identified. What does
that mean? That means once we find a partner, it's brought back to council
for our approval or just >> letting you know and let the
administration do the rest. Is that what we're suggesting here to be clear?
» Mhm. I think so. Council >> happy to respond to your worship and yes
I think that's what it is. So from the report, what I'm gathering is it does
not make sense operationally for the city to manage it. But an organization
with volunteers, for example, might be able to take that on operationally. And
I think if somebody wants to do that, then why not?
» It doesn't designate. The reason why I'm asking for some clarity doesn't say
where it's going to be, what it's going to look like, none of those things
» because we need that partner to come forward first.
» Yes. But we're not asking for approval from council. We're just saying we're
just going to let council know that we found a partner.
I'd like more clarity if I'm going to be voting on this. So again, it it says
the way I understand it is we're going to send out an expression of interest
» and only bring back a report to council if a capable partner is identified.
Report doesn't mean decision. So, does it does this imply that once
administration if they find a capable partner, they're just going to let us
know with a report? Or does it mean council, we found a partner, we we want
to talk to you about where we're going to put this. We want to talk to you
about uh what this partner's intentions are. We we want an area that's
designated at the skate park or on John Peak, the roof of John Peak Gazebo or
wherever we're going to put this thing. Um, I'd like to see that clarification
before we vote on this, unless the clarification is implied to come later.
» So, so then what I would suggest is that uh we could just have it and report
back. No, no, don't don't don't change anything. Sorry. Bring it back. Yeah,
there we go. Uh, and report back to council
with a report for decision
only. So that then implies that the report that comes back is a report for
decision. >> This this clarifies that question. Thank
you. >> Okay. Thank you. Councelor are
you okay with that wording being added? >> Sure.
» Okay. Thank you. Okay. Councelor Grant. >> Thank you, Mayor Dean. I I just want to
point out the fact that really the most viable spots for this graffiti wall are
municipally owned. So, I want to make sure that we're not taking that out of
the picture right now that this could be installed on public property because
really for this to actually be viable, that's where it'll have to be in my
opinion. So, I just want to make sure that we're not excluding that. We're not
cuz in the report we talk about how it needs to be on private property by a
willing person and and really that's in Chesmer that's not going to work. So, um
if that's not here then I'm fine with this motion.
» Okay. Thank you. Uh any other comments,
questions from councel? Call for the vote.
And that's carried unanimously. Thank you. With that, we'll take a short uh 5m
minute break for it before and have our final presentation before lunch. We'll
come back at 11:20. Thanks everyone.
Good morning everyone. Uh just coming back from our break and we'll tackle the
next few items here before we have our uh lunch break. Going to item 10.4.1
which is the extension of motions deadline being presented by Mr. Kent
Edney our CEO. Good morning again Mr. Edney.
reminded me of an old movie with Robin Williams there. The way you said that
for a second. Good Morning Vietnam. I don't know.
» Do it. Do it for us. Do it. >> I'm not doing it. I'm not good at that
kind of stuff, but I'm sure sure there's another counselor that would like to.
» Mr. Edney. [laughter] >> All right. Thank you, Mayor Dean. Um,
couple quick motions that uh administration is hoping that council
will extend the deadline for. Um, both are related to transit. Um and both are
related to us working with the city of Calgary right now at this point. So
council had made a couple motions to bring back uh work related to the
transit feasibility study as well as exploring uh proposed route 106 and
potential for on demand service uh with the city of Calgary to bring that back
by the end of July. Um we have been working with the city of Calgary. They
have sent us a proposal. we just don't have enough time to move go back and
forth with them, prepare reports and bring them to council by the end of
July. So, we're uh respectfully asking for a extension to do that by the end of
September. So, there are two motions proposed just
for council to extend these to the end of September if you could.
» Thank you. Just before that, I'm wondering Mr. though.
Is there any kind of an update at this time at all? Right now, I do know that
uh even as uh early as this past week, uh I have
received a few different uh phone calls and messages uh with regards to where we
are at with transit. So, I'm just wondering if there's any kind of an
update that we can provide uh or just to help council with some of the questions
uh that we are receiving because I have certainly been I I received a number of
phone calls actually uh ironically this week about transit. Mr. Edney.
» Yeah, thanks Mayor Dean. Um practically, no, not at this point. Um we're still
working through >> those costing options and the direction
um with the city of Calgary. Uh so really practically other than we're
working and we're in the final stages of bringing something back to council for
your consideration there's no I guess tangible tangible update for the public
in that regard other than we'll bring something back to you in September. So
some of the messaging from council could be should council be asked certain
questions so that we have consistent messaging. Uh is that due to the
complexity of implementing a transit system in the city of Chester uh
administration has asked for some more time to be able to work through some of
those complexities and a further report will be coming back in September.
» That's a perfect answer. >> Beautiful. That's what I will
» much better than what I just did. >> Uh councelor
» Thank you your worship. Question through you to Mr. Edney. It sounds like uh
there's one option coming back for transit and that is a partnership with
city of Calgary. Is that correct, >> Mr. Edney?
» No, sorry. Um for clarification to councelor Samber, we are bringing other
options. Um it just took us longer to get a reply from the city of Calgary and
now um evaluate that and consolidate that into our options for council. So,
it won't be just the city of Calgary, but
that's the last the most recent information we've received that we need
to incorporate into the report. >> Thank you, Deputy Mayor Schindler.
» Uh yeah, through the chair to um to uh CEO, Mr. Edney, if there's any um uh
going into Stampede, we're bound to be in the room with people who can uh help
help this along. If you need us to do anything uh um around um advocation, uh
please let us know. >> Thank you. I think this is a purely
administrative matter though at this point. I don't think that this is an
elected matter at all at this time. I think that this sits purely with
administration. Mr. Edney. >> Yeah, that's correct. Mayor Dino, we've
received everything now at this point I think we need from the city of Calgary.
They're working cooperatively, but um sometimes they just take a little bit
longer in responses um given the the scope of their operations. So, I think I
think we're in good shape that way. But appreciate the offer, Deputy Mayor.
» Thank you. Okay. Uh with that, uh can I have the
first motion, please? >> Oh, it's we're putting them together.
Thank you. Can I have a counselor make the following motion, please?
Councelor Nan move that council approve the revised reporting timelines to
September 2026 for the following motions as outlined below. Motion number 26041
um 14-09 council endorses the hybrid fixed route plus on demand uh one zone
transit service as the preferred service model for chastir and direct
administration to evaluate funding and cost recovery options to implement a
chestir transit system and bring to council by the end of September 2026 and
motion number 260414- -10 council direct administration to
further explore transit partnership with the city of Calgary including the
proposed route 106 at uh and a potential for on demand service
and bring back to council by the end of September 2026.
» Thank you. Comments, questions from council.
Call for the vote.
That's carried unanimously. Thank you. Citywide facilities planning report
presented by again our CEO Mr. Edney. Mr. Edney.
» All right. Thank you, Mayor Dean. Um I'm going to jump in this particular report
uh to page three if we could. Legislative services not of that
particular report of the RFD.
Thank you. Uh just on this table here, so I'm going to jump ahead a little bit.
Um this motion originally from council came out of a number of items that were
brought forward during the 2026 um budget cycle and uh related to chain
link fence over at community operations uh land preparations of some some land
over at the community operations site. Um our future needs uh we had a request
to create we called it a human resources office but it was really an office next
to human resources. Uh there was the RCMP second and third floor concept
along with additional parking over at the RCMP building and then there was the
rental space for community support services. So my report today, what we've
done is rather than necessarily look at each of these individual things, we've
taken out the chain link fence and the community operations land prep. Uh, so
if council recalls, um, there was a a land swap done back, I think in 2024
with Clearwater Park whereby I think we received somewhere in the neighborhood
of 3 or 4 acres, uh, of land adjacent to our south part of our community
operations building in exchange for a road right away that we had in their
community. Um, typically what has happened in the past is as we collect
lakeweeds, not just from the harvesters, but from the lakeweed bins, we've been
using um the land to the east of our community
operations building in Clear Water Park for the composting uh and storage of
these lake weeds. Now that Clear Water is at the stage of development it's at,
we no [snorts] longer have access to that particular uh piece of land. we now
need to start either a bringing those lake weeds etc onto our own property or
we need to look at um transporting them somewhere else for disposal. Uh the
obviously transporting them somewhere else has a cost doesn't make a lot of
sense. What we've done as we've worked through this process is realize that we
can actually do the preparation of that land um with our internal resources um
with our roads and operations staff. So we are going to move ahead um with again
just making it suitable for vehicles to drive onto um flattening it out that
kind of thing. the outstanding item from the budget then related to that
particular property is it would be prudent of us to fence that land off um
like we do with any other land. We want to prevent uh unauthorized access onto
it. We want to be able to park vehicles there securely. Uh we want to prevent
illegal dumping, that type of thing. So, uh we're looking for a budget request
for $60,000 to move forward with the chain link fence. Again, it was the same
number in our um in our original capital budget presentation to council. Why I've
jumped forward to this particular table is the other four um four items we're
addressing through a larger uh facilities planning framework document
that we've we've put together. Um obviously future needs is a very very
broad um broad request and is really what the intent of this report is to
allow us to set a framework. Um as you talked about or as we talked about
earlier um we want to have policies and documents that guide what we do moving
forward. So we've worked uh across all city departments to develop the um
report that that uh ledge services originally had up that is attached to
your the facilities planning report. The intent of this report is to give comfort
to council I guess that um we're thinking about what needs to be done. Uh
we've laid out um sort of the purpose, the nature and overview of our current
facilities. we have uh some of the challenges we're facing at those
facilities. Also prioritizing where we're short in space, where we see
priorities for the community. Um if we were on page seven of that particular
report um if we don't mind bringing that back up there Josh
um you know just talking about the different things we see coming up and
where it sits from administration's perspective um in our priority as we
think about these new spaces and these new sites. Obviously the second fire
hall is something that uh we've been working on is important to the
community. uh you'll see a report coming to you in July about the fireh hall and
a request to to move forward with that particular
uh particular item in city hall. Um again, if you kind of read through the
report, we talk about it, but we're still doing a bunch of work in the
background. We're running out of space. I've talked about that a number of
times. You see that as you work through here. There is very few offices where we
only have one person left at this point and and that's really me and uh you know
in some cases we have directors partnered up uh with other people in
their office. So we're running out of space in city hall. Um and you can kind
of see as we work work down that list of what we've prioritized really as um not
necessarily priorities. I think everything in this list could be
considered a priority. It's just the staging and access of that um staging
not access development of that. So one of the things we've done outside of this
is again try to target what what might be happening first and what that may
open up before we get too far down on any particular item. If we go to the
next page, Josh, um, and we look at the table on the key dependencies just at
the bottom there. Uh, scroll down. Um, you know, if we know the second fireh
hall is coming most likely before the library or the
rec center or any work at community operations, we want to evaluate how can
the fire hall potentially help us um, solve some of these challenges with
space, right? Um, if we're able to move the library out to somewhere else, that
unlocks space at city hall. Again, if we put the rec center and the library
together, we've heard that a number of times, having them colllocated is
something that makes sense. So, you might be able to move faster on a
library than a rec center. So, again, if we're going to put the two together, we
have to look at that timing. So, this this document is really for council's
information. Um, I mean, if you have feedback, we're open to it, but it's
really to guide us administratively on how we're thinking about our future
needs in the city. Um, I'll I'll speak candidly. I think not I think I know at
budget time we came with a lot of one oneoff ad hoc projects thought of by a
particular group that needed that specific project to happen from their
point of view from what made sense for their
um ability to complete their work and their tasks. And this is a way to
comprehensively bring all of those needs, all of those requests into one
into one framework where we look at it holistically across all different
departments and then um can use that uh to guide us over the next you know 1 3 5
years 10 years into the future as the city continues to grow and we look at uh
what staffing needs we'll need. So, um, real quickly to wrap the report up, um,
we'll be looking for two motions from council. One to request that you approve
to proceed with the budget item on the chain link fence at a cost of $60,000.
Um, I know elsewhere in the report it references 56,000. We've received quotes
on this. We did that before we went to budget. Uh, just given a little bit of
room um, in case something comes up that we need another,000, we're not back to
council. um rather than approving 56 and then just that you receive this this
planning report uh for information as sort of our framework for coordinating
future facility decisions. I guess I'm open open to any questions you have
either on the RFD or the report um that's been presented. [snorts]
» Great. Thank you. Any comments or questions from council with regards to
the presentation? >> Councelor Grant.
» Thank you, Mayor Dean. Through the chair to Mr. Edney, I'm looking at the
priorities and decision readiness uh table that's been developed here.
Uh you have the future recreation center as a long-term item. Is that the Dawson
Recreation Center? >> Oh, sorry. Uh Mr. Edney,
» yes, that is correct. So given that the cost for the rec
center is included in the 2027 budget, that doesn't feel long-term to me. So
maybe you could explain, >> Mr. Edney.
» Yeah, thank you, Mayor Dean. Um, that's a really good question. Um,
you've hit on something. Long term for us should be 15 to 20 years. uh the
state the city of Chesmir is in with our growth and our lack of really progress
on much prior to this council first being elected. Um long term for us is 5
years. So you're right, it's in uh it's in the budget for 2027. It's really in
the budget as a placeholder for that particular amount. Hoping that council
will will get to a point where council can make a decision this year or next
year. Um, but I wouldn't expect it to open, you know, any sooner than 2029,
2030. So, it's not going to solve our space problems um in city hall, I guess,
for a few years. So, that's kind of why we picked that that longer term um
longer term designation with it. >> Okay. Um I I accept that and I
understand it. I just I want to push back a little bit that at least for me
the rec center is at uh at least medium to high priority. So um I know that this
table is going to be used to make decisions moving forward. Um and that at
least for me I would like to see that moved up or at least looked at with a
little more urgency. Um I I you go sorry I don't want to go on a diet trap but
you go down into your prior prioritization framework and a lot of
this stuff applies to the rec center. It hits many of these points.
So I would like to I would like to I don't know if I need a motion to have
you move that up but I would like I would like a more prioritization kind of
put on that than what I feel this document is giving it.
» Yeah. I don't I don't disagree with you that I I think that we've made it uh
very clear that new rec center is a high priority. Uh and
given the commentary, I appreciate the commentary, Mr. Edney. Given that
commentary though, it almost makes it feel like an expansion of the second and
third floor of the RCMP building is a higher priority than the rec center. And
I'm I'm not convinced that this is how all of this council feels.
I would suggest that's certainly not how you feel,
[laughter] >> Mr. Edney.
» Yeah, Mayor Dean, I think what might be useful for us is to split that out. I
think the intent there is we all know building the rec center is is a high
priority. Um, one of the challenges of course is I think everything on here
could be high priority and then when everything's high priority, nothing's
high priority. So, we sort of called it more long-term knowing that it's not
something that solves our problem from a space usage this year. Um, but longer
term, I think the intent of this probably could be broken out into two.
Um, where it's phase one recreation center, high priority, short-term,
long-term use of all of that land um might be a better breakout. So maybe
that's what I can take away from this and update this to have the phase one
facility is, you know, short-term high priority, but the longer term use of all
of that land um is still a priority, but it's a longer term exercise.
» Okay. Thank you. >> If that works works for Grant, does that
work? >> Uh councelor Grant. Thank you, Mayor
Dean. Thank you, Mr. Andy. Yes, that works for me.
» Great. Thank you. Any other comments, questions with regards to presentation?
Seeing none, going to the first motion then for uh the approval of proceeding
with the chain link fence. Can I have a council with the following motion,
please?
Councelor Randawa. >> Thank you, your worship. I move that the
council approve a proceeding with the chain link fence at a cost of $60,000.
» Uh thank you. Does the motion need what area of the budget that $60,000 is
coming out of? Mr. Edney. Oh, sorry, Mr. Edney.
» Sorry, Mayor Dean. Yeah, let's just put um at a cost of from the capital budget.
» Okay. Uh thank you, uh councelor Warzinowski.
» Thank you, Mayor De. And just just a clarification through the chair to you,
Mr. Edney, at a cost of 60,000 extra or from the already pre-approved capital
budget. >> Mr.
Um, so yeah, this would be extra because there's no budget approved for the chain
link fence. >> So it's not actually coming from an
approved budget then. >> That's correct. [snorts]
» So then it's not coming from a a capital budget.
» Well, okay. You could reward it to council approve.
Uh, [sighs] >> we can reallocate for sure to increase
the capital budget by 60,000. How about that?
» Yes, let's use that word.
No, not reallocating. >> No, increasing. Oh, sorry. You
[snorts] okay? Uh, councelor Anda, I believe it was you that made this
motion. Is that right? Can I get you to restate the motion, please?
» Sure. Meen, I move that the council approved increasing the 2026 capital
budget by 60,000 for the chain link fence at community appreciations.
» Thank you. Any other comments, questions from council?
Call for the vote.
» That's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh, can I have the second motion,
please?
We're accepting it for information, which means that
it's a presentation that was made. It's not an approval. It's accepting
information. I'm just making sure that we capture what councelor Grant's
comment was. So, sorry, I'm thinking out loud.
Uh, Mr. Edney, I think we would agree that this is an internal document used
for internal operations as per the CEO. The CEO has received the feedback from
council that he was looking for and will be looking to make updates to the
document. But because it's an internal document, council essentially accepts
this for information because it is how you are proceeding internally with
something. Would that >> be correct, Mr. Edney?
» Yeah, that's correct, Mayor Dean. Um, I know I wrote these motions, but I think
I would just end that for information. Otherwise, it implies you're setting
this as some sort of formal >> That's where we're going. Yeah, that's
what I was working through. Thank you for that. Obviously, I didn't say it in
the out loud, but in the report, anything that has to do with any of this
that requires any sort of capital or council approval will have a separate
report and be brought back. >> Yeah, absolutely. But this this really
is an internal document. >> Yes.
» Yeah. Absolutely. Okay. Uh so, uh can I have a counselor make the following
motion, please? Deputy Mayor Schindler. >> I move that council receive the citywide
facilities planning report attachment A for information. comments, questions
from councel, call for the vote
and that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Okay, now moving to item 10.4.3.
This was the additional to the agenda which is the CRCA facility funding and
I'm going to go back to our CEO, Mr. Edney. Mr. Edney.
» Thank you, Mardine. I'll just wait for ledge services. Um, this is not a RFD
that is in your agenda package. Um this is from some discussions that occurred
uh I guess after preparation of the agenda occurred related to um some
operations over at the current rec center operated by the CRCA. Um as I
understand it um a number of counselors have had discussions with the White
Cappers group um about some facility improvements that they're undertaking
over at the CRCA. The question came to me from a bunch of different angles of
is this something the city could help support and is there some way that the
city could support this initiative with the White Cappers given they're a
nonforprofit and the the money that they're proposed to be spending is
related directly to facility improvements over at the CRCA. So my
report here today is to address that for council. if you'd like to make any sort
of motion. Um if not, then we can just move forward. But the thought process
here is um in the interimm operating budget and the final operating budget,
council approved $160,000 be allocated to the Chester Regional
Community As Association. Um at the time it was really a placeholder um because
that's typically what we provide them over the past few years. is there was a
request from council made for the CRCA to come to council and present um what
they would use that money for. We haven't seen that happen yet. We're
still coordinating. Um and at this point it's likely sometime in the fall. Um my
thought process is this is a you know about a $5,000 upgrade the White Cappers
are looking to make to lights uh and improving lighting in the space that
they rent at the CRCA. uh from my perspective this is you know a building
improvement being made by a third party to a third
parties [laughter] to a third party's building and I think
it's in the spirit of what that original allocation from council um was set aside
for. So my um my recommendation if council would like to do something um
for this would be to allocate $5,000 from the funds allocated to the CRCA in
the operating budget. Um, if that's done, it still leaves them 155,000 uh
for their other needs and uh hopefully since we haven't heard yet exactly what
those needs are, hopefully that's enough for them at that point. So, I'll maybe
turn it over to you, Mayor Dean, at this point to talk a little bit more about
kind of where this came from. >> Yeah, I want to clarify a couple things.
Number one, the White Cappers did not ask for this. Uh, this was not the White
Cappers in no way, shape, or form uh approach the city with regards to this.
Uh this happened because of the regular work that this council does of being
involved in the community and recognizing needs and hearing things. Um
and this is about a facility upgrade to the current recreation center. This is
not in any way, shape, or form money that is going to a not for-profit that
exists within the rec center. This money would be going specifically
uh to the CRCA for the purpose of doing a facility upgrade um that is needed.
Anybody that has been in the uh white capper space uh will recognize that uh
there is a need uh [snorts] for this work to be done in that space. Uh and so
so again uh this would be specifically
uh uh paying for an upgrade uh that is need. it's an identified need that's uh
within the CRCA and the money would be going uh specifically uh towards uh
that. Um and so yeah, I I certainly support uh being able to do this and and
uh being able to move forward and would further encourage uh the presentation
coming from CRCA so that uh we can continue to partner and work together on
improving uh our current recreational facility. So with that, I'm going to
ask, do I have a counselor that would be willing to make the following motion,
please? Councelor Warsowski. >> Yeah, I can make the motion. I had a
question. I can I can present it in debate.
» Sure. >> Do you want to do the motion and ask?
Yes. >> Which way do you want to go?
» I'll do both. >> Okay.
» I'll just leave my mic on, please. >> Y.
» Thank you. I motion council direct administration to apply up to $5,000
from the $160,000 allocation to the Chesmir Regional Community Association
toward the estimated cost of lighting improvements in the lease space occupied
by the Chesmir White Cappers Association within that facility.
» Thank you. Comments, questions from council. Council Warzinowski. Uh, yes.
My question is if there's a $160,000 allocation and there's a need to upgrade
that facility, why wouldn't the CRCA already just pay for this?
Um so uh one of the things that we learned within that is that uh this
particular tenant uh has been paying uh for
uh facility upgrades for the area that they utilize. Um don't have a direct
question to that. I do know that um in in my opinion this is a way for uh us as
the new uh lease to help one of our leases with uh facility improvements of
that building. >> Okay. Um no I understand your answer.
Thank you Mayor Dean. I don't know nor I don't know if we
understand what the lease agreement looks like between the two companies.
Um, I would suggest that we stay out. I'm not saying I supported I actually do
support this. However, with the if I knew the lease agreement said that the
lease is supposed to pay for these marginal improvements, then it's up to
them. They know the lease that they've signed. If it's not council, I'm going
to call for an in camera for section 29 under advice from officials.
» Sure, let's do that. >> Can I uh have the motion to go in
camera, please, for section 29 advice from officials?
» [clears throat]
» Can I have a counselor make the following motion, please? Uh, councelor
Rosski, can you just make this motion? >> Sure. Yeah, my mic is still on. Thank
you. >> Thank you.
» I motion council move into a close session at 11:51 to discuss the
following. CRCA facility improvement facility improvements access to
information act section 29 advice from officials.
» Uh call for the vote [snorts]
» that's car I'm okay with everybody stay. Yeah.
I thought you said >> thank you. Thank you everyone. Uh
looking to for the motion to come out of our closed session. Uh councelor
Worinowski. >> Gladly chair. I motion that council come
out of close session at 11:57 a.m. >> Thank you. Uh call for the vote.
Uh, councelor Nine,
that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh, we'll take our procedural bylaw 5m
minute break and we will come back at 12:02. Thanks everyone.
Good
morning everyone. Just coming back uh from our uh break that we need to take
after every in camera session. Uh just wanted to uh make a comment about the
reason for the in camera. um council. Uh the city of Chesmer does not discuss uh
lease agreements andor binding agreements that exist uh between other
parties that we may be associated with. Uh those uh discussions are um are
protected. Uh those agreements are protected and so uh that is a purpose
why uh that would happen. It may be a different situation if the agreement was
between uh the city of Chester and a party. Uh but when uh we work with a
party and they have an agreement party to party uh then that's a bit of a
different situation. So again uh the motion is on the floor uh for city
administration to direct uh to council direct administration to apply 5,000
from the already allocated money that has already been allocated in the budget
uh that was made public uh during um uh during our uh budget deliberations. Uh
and so uh so again uh and again this money to clarify would go to the CRCA
for improvements of the CRCA and would not be going uh to the white cappers. Uh
comments, questions from council before calling for the vote.
[snorts] Councelor Sanbo.
» Thank you worship. One comment on this. Um there is a level of discomfort with
this because the typical process of allocating money of course outside of
the granting process is that um a receiving organization would come and
present to council and make that request. So I think this is a really
good use of this funding but I do want to stress that this is outside the
normal process. The ideal process for this would have been for the CRCA to
come and ask for this money. Um however it is my understanding that um both the
uh lei and the sub lei um are aware of this idea and see no issues with it. I
have a concern that this $160,000 is going to disappear into next year's
budget and not get spent this year. So I'm definitely in favor of this. But I
want to really encourage the CRCA to come and present and tell us what you
need money for because this council and this administration is just absolutely
begging to put money into this facility as evidenced with this motion.
» Yeah, thank you. Uh that is absolutely correct. Uh the parties that are
involved in this have been communicated with council is all aware of that and
the outcome of that conversation uh and the support uh from the organizations
with regards to that. So that is that is absolutely true uh that those
conversations with the interested parties did happen. Um and yeah, you're
you're absolutely right uh that um uh in terms of process uh things can happen
also though in unique ways when we see um a need that arises within our
community. There is also some time sensitivity around with this uh with
regards to that space in that uh they are experiencing problems with uh not
being able to get parts to replace lights and some of their lights are
burnt out and because of the age of those things they they just don't are
not able to get uh access to being able to do some of that work which also um
influences this. Councelor Grant. >> Thank you. Mayor Dean through the
charity administration uh Mr. Edney. Um, can you can confirm that this is uh an
operational budget item and that it's going to a capital upgrade?
» Mr. Edney. >> Thank you, Mayor Dean. Yeah, through to
council grant's question. Um, yes, this is acceptable way to do this. Um, lots
of municipalities will fund capital projects through their operating budget.
The city of Chester mayor since my time being here before I got here hasn't ever
actually funded capital projects through tax dollars. It's always been through
grants, reserves, some other mechanism. So, um it's completely acceptable to
fund a capital project out of the operating budget. Um so, this project is
okay >> and some of those grants are taxpayer
dollars. >> Correct.
» Community grants are taxpayer dollars and some of those community grants have
been used for operational items in the community.
» Correct. Yes. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mayor De. I had one more
follow. >> Thank you. Um, so my feelings on the
motion has been made, correct? Sorry. >> Correct.
» Uh, my feelings on this is that, uh, you know, being a person that uses CRCA
quite a bit. Um, I don't necessarily want to be the one deciding what
upgrades happen in that facility. Um, I've seen the facility report and
there's about $2 million worth of facility upgrades that are needed there.
Um, and I hear on the weekly about showers needing to be done or um, other
areas that need um, support as well. So, I'm I'm very uncomfortable with kind of
deciding who's going to be the beneficiary of this money. I would
prefer if the CRCA decided who was going to do it within their plans. Um, so just
for me, I'm not comfortable with that. I don't really want to get advocated to
when I go to the arena for from minor hockey for money for a thing. So, um, I
just I'm not in favor of for that reason and I'll just leave it at that.
» Thank you. I appreciate that commentary. Something I would add to that is part of
the reason why too we want to have the conversations and the presentations is
because there's uh things like the green building fund that we would like to work
with them on to bring some of those uh larger items to uh and again this was
not about advoc advocacy. Nobody necessarily approached on this and and I
don't think and also president sending is not a piece this is about uh a
specific need that was identified that then has been uh brought forward
councelor Randawa >> thank you your worship
actually I have only I'm bit uh concerned about that because we already
in the past few months we made a motion to keep 160 for CRCA and the other thing
is because you mentioned that the white cappers did not ask for the money and
then why we have to give and the other thing
is I would like any uh organization to come and present at the council to ask
for money and then we can make at the council debate and follow motion. So
that's why um at this moment for that uh I'm not comfortable. I want I actually
want to directly listen from the white cappers. Thank you.
» Thank you. That's why the money is not this is again to be very very clear. The
reason I support this motion is because the money is not going to the white
cappers. That's why I support this motion. This money is going to a
facility upgrade of the CRCA. They operate their programming inside of
that space. That's true. But this money is not going to the white cappers. This
money is going to the CRCA for a facility upgrade inside the CRCA.
Council Ryan. >> Thank you, Royship. Um through members
of council. So I'm in support of the of giving the $160,000 to CRCA. I'm also in
support for giving the $5,000 to the white cappers. It just seems a little
wonky the way, you know, I think all of this is happening because
um essentially we're giving money and we're stipulating that this is how you
should be using it. Um yes, we're going to say that use it towards capital
project yet there's no real way or reporting back to see if this money will
be actually utilized for a capital project. Um,
again, I'm in support for this, but I, you know, even go as far as saying that
I want to give $160,000 to CCA, but then also give uh an additional $5,000,
making it $165,000 um directly to to white cappers.
» Yeah, I guess I I guess on that we would have to have a completely different
motion and have an increase to the budget of $5,000. And uh that's in my
opinion would be to utilize your word would be even more wonky uh because then
without an ask from either the CRCA or the white cappers we are making an
addition to the budget. This to me again the reason I am so supportive of this is
that this is money that was allocated to the CRCA. Um and one of the desires that
we had seen is they are one of the few organizations in the city of Chester uh
where we have traditionally given them money without a reporting structure. Uh
and we are the only municipality that does that with them. They have a
reporting structure to Rocky View County whenever they spend money uh and have
made presentations and have made applications including for this year
that they have made an application for specific dollar amounts with the reason
of why those dollar amounts are being used. And so I guess for me I I'm
I would love to see our municipality treated within the same respect. Uh and
so again, this is it falls within a budget that we had allocated and it is
just utilizing that money for a very specific
project for that organization. Council Warzinowski.
» Thank you, Mayor Dean, and thank you for making some of those
clarifications. I know I stated the motion. I really haven't said which way
I'm leaning. While I was initially leaning in support, I'm now leaning in
opposition for the reasons that yes, I agree with Mayor Dean. All of these
things should be presented. If we're planning on giving $160,000 or any money
to the CRC, they should they should tell us what they're spending their money on.
I don't think we should. $5,000 is a drop in the bucket. It's not about the
money. It's about understanding what this CRCA is responsible in doing with
that facility with the 160,000 or any other funding that they get. If it turns
out that they don't make this upgrade, I'd rather see the white cappers come to
us and say, "Listen, they're making us pay for this. We're asking for the
money." Add further to councelor San Councelor Sanbo's commentary while she's
in support actually changed my mind because this isn't standard practice. I
know we do often fund projects that are not presented before us. Uh this one,
the white cappers are we have a great relationship with them. If they don't in
if this is not passed and they don't get the money, if the CRCA does not do the
upgrades with this 5K, then uh I'd like to see an alternative brought towards
council from the community to pay for the lighting in that facility. Thank
you. >> So, here's what I think is going to
happen. First of all, I don't think it's appropriate for the White Cappers to
come and ask for the money from the 160 for them. So, they would be coming and
asking for an additional budget request, which I'm not sure we should be doing.
Secondly, um the other concern that I have with that is I agree with council
is that we have been asking so the earliest we're going to see a
presentation is 10 months at least after the original ask for them to come and
present and this meets a need that exists right now. They have a need right
now that exists that has been expressed and that we're able to go and I
appreciate the fact that the CRCA uh their board is run by a group of
volunteers who are a very busy group of volunteers and to me here's an
opportunity for us to meet a very practical need that is right in front of
them uh that that we are uh that we are aware of um and is not then having to
have a not for-profit who operates programming inside of that building have
to come and advocate for their own for capital up for capital costs that are
for the CRCA. I I think that's a far more
complicated process. Councelor Sambbo, >> thank you your worship. And I would
agree. I think if this was in addition to not um not from a lack of willingness
to support the the nonprofit, the white cappers, um but that would have to go
through the grant adjudication committee. That would just be fair. Um I
did want to point out that if this motion does go ahead, this puts all the
control into the CRCA's hands because they could say no to receiving this
money, right? You know, we can't force them to take this money. were just
saying, "Hey, here's something we heard about within this allocation that we'd
like you to spend some money on," which is what funders do. That's a very normal
process. Somewhere along the line, City of Chester granting got way out of
whack, and this is just not how funding happens. Um, so if the CRCA took a
longer look at this, because from what I understand, we've heard from at least um
a representative of of the CRCA that this could be uh agreeable. um
if they take a longer look at this and they decide that's not the best use of
that money, they can come back, give a presentation to council and say what
they would like to ask for, it's what they do for Rocky View County and any
other grant that they're asking for. So I Yes, it's outside regular process, but
I hope that this spurs a little bit more conversation and again, let's just spend
some money on this facility this year. >> Absolutely. I it is it is shocking to me
that we see a need uh and we're not wanting uh to spend a practical need
that's right in front of us for a very low low amount of money and lowrisk
opportunity that is absolutely shocking to me. Councelor Schindler, uh, sorry,
Deputy Mayor Schindler, uh, to through you to the rest of
council, I I hear your trepidations and I I I understand that, uh, you know, you
can look at it two different ways. We're reducing their funding by $5,000 and
we're only going to give them 155 and maybe we should have given it to them at
the beginning of the year with no strings attached and and uh, you know,
done what we've done years past. I want to just push back on that and say that
we're stewards of the taxpayer dollar. Um, and we make everybody come to us and
ask who outside of us who who uh want money. They they have to do a
presentation just like they have to do a presentation with every single other
organization that they work for to get money. Um it's very unique that we would
just give people $160,000 of taxpayer money without um without at
least a conversation. And you all know we've been asking for that conversation
for a long time. And this money's just been burning a hole in our pockets um
since since budget. Um, we're giving five grand to the CRCA,
which is exactly what we had planned to do. They haven't given us a
presentation. We're going to give it to them anyways
if we pass this. Um, are they going to spend it on lighting? Yeah, they could.
They might not. But at the same time, we're giving them the money and trying
desperately to spur them on to come have a conversation with us. I honestly I
can't figure out why they haven't come yet because I know if any other not
forprofit was in this community that was sitting with $160,000
in front of them like a carrot, they would certainly be u leading straight to
council chambers and doing even a rudimentary presentation. This is who we
are and this is what we do in the community. Um
please please let's give them some money and yes it's going to go to the white
cappers. It's uh space, but let's let's put some money
in their pocket and give them that that incentive to come to us for the rest of
it to do whatever and then we'll help them with the green municipal fund. We
can goodness they're they need to leverage us because they need funding
for upgrades and we are willing to help them. I I I don't know what else I can
say other than please support this because we're we need to get them at the
table yesterday. Thanks councelor Mandalo.
» Thank you your worship. I agree with the councelor Schindler. Um yes this money
is not going directly to uh to white cappers is going to CRCA.
So why don't we give just the whole fund to the CRCA and we know that building is
old the lights need to be changed those all we all know that's understandable.
So why don't we just why we if we request them to come I have no idea why
they are not coming to be honest if they are going to rocky view present
everything so I think we need to dig more deeper the reason
either they are upset or some other reason they don't want to come to
console to present or think even though they know clearly there's 100 160,000
sitting for them so rather rather than making these portions 5,000 10,000 or
25,000 so just give it to them uh towards for the facility I think that
should be agreed then >> thank you I think it's a good reminder
here too that motions were made of council to handle it in this way uh and
if a council wants to make a different motion uh then that uh can be done but
the motion from council was for the presentation to come uh and motions of
council need to be supported by all members of council unless a different
motion or different direction is taken. Uh so just a reminder that this was a
direction very clear direction of council as to what we were doing with
the 160,000 for uh the CRCA. Uh councelor Warzinowski.
» Uh thank you chair. Uh one last comment just just to reinforce what you're
saying as well to our deputy and councelor Randawa.
This motion was not presented by me in any way to incentivize the CRCA to come
here and present. It's very clear on what the ask is here and I would suggest
that whatever you're voting on is based on that motion. If motions want to come
out or intent of motions in the future about how we're going to spend $160,000
in a rec facility, that's something that a future motion can deal with. For now,
please let's focus on this motion and let's move forward.
» Thank you. Uh Deputy Mayor Schindler. >> Um that's that's a good point. Um, I
would like to then uh have add a friendly um to uh have administration
reach out and encourage uh the CRCA to come to council um within the next 30
days >> or something to that effect.
» With with respect, we've we've already gone down that road. The invitation's
out. We've written letters. We have done everything that we can do. And I don't
think that that's a that's an entirely different motion that could be
entertained after this motion. I do not think it's a friendly to this motion.
» Okay. Councelor Warzinowski. >> No, I agree. I wouldn't accept that
friendly. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councelor Grant. Thank you,
Mayor Dean. I I just need to confirm. I So, I've been told that CRCA has reached
out to us to book a meeting. Mr. Edney, uh I'm looking to confirm if that has
actually happened or not. Mr. Rodney,
» I I was told it was Rebecca or sorry, Miss McGelry that uh was reached out to.
» Oh, um yeah, I can't comment. Um Miss McGelry would not be the right place to
book a meeting. That would be through me or the mayor. So, um or are you talking
about a time to come present? >> Yeah.
» Um I'm not sure at this stage. I don't know if Candace has heard. Um
unfortunately, Miss McGelry is out ill today, but uh I can circle back on that
with you. but they aren't on the July agenda.
» Thank you, Mr. Any. >> Okay, with that, uh I'm going to
exercise uh something I rarely do as chair in terms of uh just kind of that
final comment piece. And here's the final comment piece that I will make.
There's been a lot of comments about process and pro uh protocol and those
sorts of things. I I think the reputation I've
established as mayor, one of the reputations I think is that process is
extremely important to me. Uh and I've even done it throughout this motion
making sure that we're doing that. And so um with respect, while I was not the
one who uh brought the motion forward, I'm certainly uh a bit of a driving
force uh behind uh this particular item. Um, and I would strongly uh I would
strongly encourage and humbly ask uh that council does support uh this
motion. I do think from uh with respect to what uh councelor Warzinowski has
said, while it's not an impetus so to speak for them to come, I think that
there are some positive
uh relational and political reasons for supporting uh this motion. Um I will say
that it's unfortunate in my opinion. It is unfortunate in some ways the
direction that this conversation has gone uh because uh my hope with bringing
this forward is I thought uh simplistic uh conversation whereas now uh I I hope
that we don't have to do any kind of further uh relational um conversations
uh because again I do want to reiterate both organizations were contacted about
this both organizations were aware that this was coming forward and both
organizations have expressed support for this happening. I think that that is
very key in this. Uh and I certainly in my position as chair would not have
pushed andor allowed for this to have hit the agenda had those organizations
not expressed support. Um but uh support was expressed for this particular idea
from both organizations. And so again, I would strongly encourage and humbly ask,
uh that uh council support this particular motion. So with that, um
call for the vote.
And that is that motion is defeated by majority vote.
Thank you. With that, we will uh break for lunch.
Good afternoon everyone. Coming back from our lunch break now and uh
proceeding on with our agenda. We're going to move to item 10.5.1
which is city hall parking lot expansion. Uh this is being uh presented
by Mr. Dr. Janed Ahmed uh senior project manager and such Chennok a director of
community growth and infrastructure. Good afternoon Mr. Chennok.
» Good afternoon. Good afternoon mine members of council for the record my
name is Sachuk director of community growth and infrastructure division and
with me is Janeed Ahmed our senior project manager. Uh we are here to
present city hall parking lot expansion options.
» [clears throat] >> I'll start the presentation and then
Jonath will take over for some u options that we have. Um throughout this
presentation we'll be presenting the motion that council asked us to work on
work on uh some background purpose statement understanding what class D
estimates are uh some options that we've worked on and then an alternate strategy
and then our recommendations to council this uh I'd pass it on to Janate uh who'
walk you through some of the options. Thank you so much S. Good afternoon
mayor and council. Um as we see that thing in December 2025 uh a motion was
passed by council uh that directed the administration to go and work on uh the
city hall parking lot and to assess uh the operations and to get a report back
to the council in March 2026. Uh we then basically uh requested an extension on
the report submission till June 2026 and here we are presenting that. Um so going
into um the background of uh the city hall
parking lot. So this city hall and the parking lot was constructed in 2004. It
basically was designed to do uh the operations and uh fulfill the needs uh
for that time zone and with all the capacity that was there uh for the staff
that was working over the course of last decades. We have grown uh and we have
more staff working in this facility. Um this parking lot basically have got 64
parking stalls which includes four reserve for city vehicles, one for the
loading dock, two for barrierfree access. Uh that reduces the available
net to 57. Uh the staff that works in this facility is 93. Uh which basically
creates an overflow parking on specific days as well uh on regular days uh to
the adjacent uh street parkings as well as onto the properties uh adjacent to
this building. um to address this parking problem. Uh
again uh as we were directed in 2025 December by mayor and council to go back
and assess uh administration basically uh
have created and evaluated multiple options uh as a concept design and work
with our cost consultant to come up with an cost estimate which is a class D
estimate uh that will be presented in the upcoming slides. Um and then we will
also discuss an alternative parking strategy. Uh just to walk you uh through
uh a class D estimate. It's a very high level class uh estimate that has a
variance of negative 30% to plus 50. This estimate has got very minimum
information uh into it. Uh and it is only intended to use a high level
decision-m support. Um the budget that is presented in these uh estimates can
vary a lot as we dive deep into the detailed design and we go through the
construction. So it gets refined at every stage if it gets approved. Um the
estimate that were done was uh intended for the year 2027 construction season
not 2026. So we have a an inflation that is added onto that one. Uh some of the
factors that were excluded as part of the estimate were the hazardous material
in encountered uh if we can if we come across those ones uh when we do the
underground work or anything. Uh the off-site utility servicing that may or
may not uh in uh add more cost or uh schedule uh impact onto this one.
Weather conditions as well as the US tariff impacts. So those uh things were
excluded as part of the estimate. Uh if you look into the screen uh we have the
first option that we looked into and that is like adding more stalls onto the
west side of the existing parking lot removing the green space. It adds 14
stalls uh to the existing parking lot. This uh option has got the least amount
of disruption uh to the facility or the parking lot. Uh it works on the site. It
has the lowest risk, but the estimate u that we see is uh $392,000
and549.
Option number two is again uh an extension onto the west side, but it
just adds more angled parking onto it. It adds 17 more stalls to the existing
parking lot. Uh it has similar sort of risks uh as compared to the option one
and the estimate is fairly close to that one which is $395k, $863.
When you look at the option number three, that is the most expensive and
the most extensive one. Uh cuz basically we are adding the combination of option
one, option two on the west side and then the east side. It basically pushes
the shed that we have uh onto the green field. It builds up a retaining wall uh
and add more space onto it. But the maximum that we can add onto the
existing one is 35 stalls. The reason you see that it goes into over a million
dollar is because it adds a structural component onto it which basically is the
most costly item onto it. It also impacts the storm water management
because then we have to address uh the drainage issues and maintain the
existing flow to this. Now the risk that we we see on
proceeding with either of these options it's uh the cost and scope may vary
because again like this is a very basic information that was provided to the
cost consultants. Uh the more we dive deep into the structural analysis or the
road analysis the cost will change. Um the impact is uh going to be uh quite
significant because either of the cases if we have to proceed with the
construction will have certain impacts onto the operations. We'll have closures
to the entrance to the parking lot at certain time but it can vary. We don't
have those schedules cuz it's not a construction that we have dived deep
into. Um and the impact on the operation cost will increase as well cuz then we
have to maintain more cleaning uh snow removal things like that. It'll come at
a cost. The direction if you not proceed with anything the deficit on the parking
lot and all these overflow on the adjacent lands will still remain the
same. Uh [clears throat and snorts] all these options do provide uh capital
improvement. Uh but the maximum limitations of or or we can say that the
maximum parking lots that we can add is 35. It still leaves a deficit onto it.
Cuz if we compare the staff that is existing right now compared to how many
stalls we can add onto, we still have a deficit. And with the future growth of
the city, we may have more staff then we'll have this kind of uh deficiency to
continue in future as well. Uh I would like such to just sure thank you
[clears throat] Janette. Um so the improvements partially only partially
address uh the need that we have um and it doesn't necessarily give us stuff
parking stalls that would ideally like to have um on the site. Now in terms of
u council's idea of uh finding efficiencies throughout the process and
everything that we undertake, we've also undertaken an alternate parking strategy
uh study so to say. Um and the idea surrounding that was that we are going
to grow as a city regardless of what we do. Uh we currently have about 93 people
in city hall u as staff positions. Uh but we have about over 100 positions
that are approved. So we're still recruiting for a number of positions and
um those new staff members wouldn't necessarily need uh have any parking on
site. Um it is not a long-term solution. So even if we increase the number of
parking stalls, it is not going to be a long-term solution because we are
outgrowing we are uh outgrowing the capacity of the city hall and a more
permanent long-term solutions that are needs to be looked at when we are trying
to address the parking issue. And um another option another point
would be reconsidering short-term investments. So if you go ahead and
spend all the money if council so wishes uh it only again addresses the
problem in short term. it doesn't necessarily address the problem of where
do we take city hall or where are we uh having staff move in the long term. So
considering all those points, [clears throat] we looked at an
alternate parking uh strategy. Uh and we reviewed areas closer to us, one of
which was John Peak Memorial Park, uh Marina Drive and Marina Road. All of
these areas have parking available onto them. We conducted a seven business day
parking survey to understand how many of these areas have how much parking spaces
filled over uh a period. The survey that we did for Marina uh
John Peak Memorial Park gave us some information. First week as you can see
uh the maximum uh car parking that we observed there was about 26 stalls and
uh second week uh was about 38 stalls. That two was only on Friday evening.
Alter to that uh the average parking was 17 or 18 for the first two weeks. Um and
the morning parking was 10 or 11. So the overall parking
lot at John Peak was less than 15% filled in the morning [clears throat]
and about 33% filled in the evening on any given day.
Um again low morning demand with 7 to 14 vehicles recorded on John Peak. uh
moderate demand in the afternoon with 15 to 28 vehicles. Highest observation was
38 vehicles on a Friday. Uh marina road counts remain comparatively low uh and
stable indicating residual capacity. Now this is also contingent on which day are
we looking at. Uh for the most part when we have council and gap meetings, some
of these areas are filled more uh than other days. Our alternate parking
strategy proposes uh a reconfiguration of how parking stalls are distributed.
Uh in on your screen you'd see a black line in front of the parking in front of
the city hall parking lot. Uh we are proposing that we reserve six stalls for
public. Right now there are some stalls for public but everybody parks there and
so there is no real public parking stalls uh at any given point. So, we're
proposing that six stalls at the front be reserved for public only, four stalls
for city vehicles, uh two barrierfree access stalls, and one loading dock. And
that will allow us to have remaining stalls of about 51 uh on site which can
be used for staff parking. Now, John Peak Park has about 96 stalls
and overflow parking from city hall can be accommodated there during peak hours
because it's at a walking distance. It's not very far. can easily be people staff
can easily sort of park there and come to city hall walking. We can monitor the
usage at John Peak parking uh lot and if required we can also put up a reserved
parking signs for uh 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. Monday to Friday which will leave
about 56 parking stalls for public at all times even if we mark 40 stalls uh
for staff parking. As this times uh all 96 stalls will be available for public.
Now this [clears throat] is this strategy only comes into play if we
choose to go that route. This will also allow us to have Marina Road and Marina
Drive uh parking uh freed up. Marina Drive currently has about 20 stalls that
will free up if we ask staff to start parking in John Peak. And Marina Road
will have 16 has 16 parking stalls that will also free up. Um some of this will
cater to the overflow parking that we typically get uh during council and gap
meetings. Overall when we look at [clears throat]
the summary uh the project cost for option one which adds 14 stalls would be
about 400,000. Option two which adds 17 stalls would be about 400,000. Option
three would add which adds 35 stalls would be about $1.2 million. And if we
go with the alternate strategy where we just reconfigure the parking, uh we're
not necessarily looking at a significant cost except the cost for signage. Uh in
all, option one will give us 78 stalls, option two will give us 81 stalls,
option three gives us 99 stalls, and option four will give us uh 104 stalls.
With us, our recommendation to council is that council receives this report u
[cough and clears throat] on parking lot expansion options for information. Um as
it is, if we spend if council chooses uh and we spend money on a short-term
interim solution, it'll just be temporary because long-term solutions
would have to be figured out, including moving some of the staff from city hall
to elsewhere to be able to sort of uh work more efficiently. We're already
outgrowing the space and spending money at this point uh would not may not be as
useful as that money would be elsewhere. That we're open to any questions.
» Uh Mr. Ed Mr. Edby >> I think thank thank you Mayor Dean.
Yeah, excellent presentation Janade and Mr. Chandio. I think I just wanted to
add one more quick comment to the alternate parking strategy. Um that came
out of the earlier um process this morning looking at our larger uh use of
city hall space and knowing that we have some projects coming down the map. um we
don't believe it's prudent to spend money at this time to expand until we
have certainty on where staff ends up going um and where we end up you know
whether we relocate city hall or we use city hall differently in the future. Uh
so I really appreciate the team's thought and idea on um you know we kind
of brought this at budget time because it had been an existing project and when
we sat down and started working through this we said do we actually really have
a problem the answer became no not if we use some existing facilities around us.
So I want to say thanks to the team hopefully this uh report meets council
standards and and you're on board with our our short-term plan here.
» Councelor Ryan thank you worship through you uh to Mr. Adne and administration.
Fantastic presentation indeed and thank you Mr. Edney for pointing out uh you
know a few things here including uh the the future of uh of city hall and you
know what that is going to be like uh whether we're going to move and whatnot.
There's definitely you know a larger conversation um that council would have
to have sooner than later. Um I'm also really happy to see the option you know
where we don't have to put in money. That's that's always uh good. Uh I I do
have a question because the range you know of 30 to to 50% that's quite
significant. How far into the project you have to go into before you'd have a
better idea
through me to councelor Ryan. Thank you so much for that question. Um
the class D estimate is basically used to see whether the project is feasible
or not on budget side. Once uh the decision is made that yes it is feasible
to move forward. This cost is usually reduced as we proceed through the design
that's why it says -30 to plus 50. The reason at times it goes as as positive
is if we have too many unknowns into it. So tomorrow if we start to look into the
ground conditions and it comes up that we have too much hazardous material uh
that needs to be removed then the cost goes up. If the ground condition on
these kind of projects is normal, then the cost goes down because now we are
refining the scope. We not we don't have open-ended. Now we are coming and
closing it down. So if you're looking into an approximate $400,000 for option
one and two, uh if we go through that options and go to the detail design, it
should drop down easily to 20% of that one once we go into the utility locates
where we have to do things. Does the water line needs to move? Is it
interjecting or not? Things like that gets refined into it. So on a normal
scale on any capital projects they are reduced. The only time that you see the
cost going up is like we have too many unknowns.
» Okay. Uh you follow up. Uh and to my understanding and please correct me
here. So it would be relatively easier to scale back with opt scale back or
scale up with option one and two as opposed to option three.
uh through May to council again uh all these three options I just reference one
and two just for an example all these three options have got the class D
estimates they don't have all the details into it
» okay >> options three well you see it's
significantly high cuz like I said it adds a structural component onto the the
parking lot we talking about a reinforced retaining wall onto the
library slope site so that it supports the load of additional car parks and
then it moves the shed that we have onto a new location. So that whole concrete
pad needs to be either demolished or relocated. Um roughly to relocate that
shed only is close to $90,000. Yeah. So uh that's an estimate right
now. Again, if the option or the direction is to proceed in either of
those ones in future or now, we'll have to deep dive into the the details of it
and refine the cost and come back again uh to council in future for maybe a
final approved budget for that point. >> Okay. Thank you. I still like the idea
of spending no money. >> And
thank you uh your worship. Uh [clears throat] thank you for the
presentation. It's very detailed. I really appreciate for that. But
definitely the marina one on the side road and drive. Uh I be thinking when
during the winter there's a snow uh is on the side then we cannot park that
because then the road is got smaller. So that is option uh I don't consider that
but uh the other free option I would happy to consider that one and we have
that parking during the day available. Majority of the time we always go here
there even if we are not in a console we are uh I go through the city walk uh to
the lake and stuff. Yes during the day those stalls are available to park. I
think that will we consider the reason is that even we are spending money is
not that much parking is going to terminate our employees or anybody from
the public. So that that is the concern I'm seeing very clearly because it's
only few stall is increasing and we are spending quite a bit money and still is
not going to that tangible result we are looking for.
» Thank you >> Dr. Samville.
» Thank you your worship and my question through to Mr. Edney and on through to
our two presenters. Um, thank you for this. And I'm not I'm not sure if I
missed it, but it was unclear to me whether the projections and the numbers
included the needs for the library downstairs and for the public attending
the library >> through the chair to council. We have
not included uh the numbers for the library. Um we are assuming at this
point that the parking in front of library is sufficient for the most part.
uh we've not and during evenings when the library sort of gets used more uh
we'd have more spaces on the city lot city hall parking site uh parking in
front here um and even in John Peak because by that time the employees are
typically sort of they've taken off and uh there's more parking available uh at
that time so uh at this point we've not necessarily considered library into this
whole scenario. >> All right, thank you. um a comment then
on that. Um if this no money option was chosen again also like the no money
option [laughter] um but if it was chosen I would suggest uh uh just
talking to library and seeing how that might impact them. I know when I've
attended the library with my kids, I've had to park at JP before and um the
proposed plan over there would um take up all of those stalls that are closest
to the library and often uh the the folks who are visiting the library
during the day during that time when they would be blocked off have strollers
and kids and bags and and that kind of stuff. So, I wonder if there's maybe um
just a consideration in there that they might be able to give you a heads up on
to help with that planning >> through the share. can absolutely
connect with them. Um, one thing that I'd like to clarify when I say no money
is that there's no um there's no big money ask. Uh, the signs are would be
something that I think we can manage uh from our budget. Uh, but it's not a big
capital ask is where I'm going. There is still going to be a little bit of money
that's required to put up signs and stuff. So,
» Mr. Edney. >> Yeah. Thank [clears throat] you, Mayor
Dean. Just to add on to on to the comments here. I think it's important to
know we're not going to go out right away and and reserve those spots in John
Peak. Um the illustration was more for example, we have talked about
potentially just reserving like the west side, leaving the east side free for
those exact reasons. Um making staff walk a little bit further than anybody
using the library. Um, you know, I was out at lunch today and I noticed maybe
this is for Director Fluker, who isn't here, but I saw a number of people pull
up in the library parking and take their dog for a walk. So, I think that's where
we need to start is stopping that behavior, um, and getting those people
to park further down in John Peak. But, um, yeah, the intent is right now, um,
we're finding a way to make it work. And of course, when John Peak gets busier in
the summer, we tend to have staff on vacation and that kind of stuff. So,
we're hoping the process we're using now can work for a while. If we need to,
we'll put up signs, but if we don't, we'll we'll do it. But I will work with
Director Fluker on addressing the library a little bit better.
Uh, thank you. Certainly appreciate the work and the effort that's gone into
this. Director Chanok, I'm wondering if you can speak to the fact that your
alternative parking strategy seems to eliminate my parking spot. Are we
[clears throat] accounting for that? cuz I just
» I mean, we kind of made one up for me as it is so that I park far away, but uh
I'm wondering if I'm going to be able to keep that within your alternative
parking chart >> through the chair to the chair. Uh the
four city vehicle parking spots that you see includes the spot for mayor
city [laughter] >> the branch vehicles
» the No. So there's one parking spot right next to
uh the accessible stalls. that says city reserved.
» Yeah, that's where the city vehicle goes.
» That's where the city vehicle goes. And then you have three branch city
vehicles. >> Yeah,
» that's where the spot for the mayor would be.
» You're putting me closer to the door. >> Well,
» but I like staying far away cuz I didn't want any special treat.
» We'll we'll give you that one. >> All right. [laughter] Can I stay where I
am? That's all I'm >> We'll figure that out. I don't think
that's a that's a problem. Um >> I just I wanted to check. I was very
concerned. >> We'll reserve one spot for for the
mayor. >> Thank you. I appreciate that.
Okay. Any other [laughter]
» I have one now. I didn't want to lose it.
» Okay. Uh any other uh comments, questions from council? Uh councelor
Randalla. >> Thank you. This this one is just for the
future note because city is growing. um the bigger municipality I can say I
don't know about the smaller yet but the bigger municipality anytime the city is
growing the way we are growing for the future note there is uh we are planning
uh for the paid parking for those one as well for the future that's what I just
need to not now but down the road I just need to keep that consideration because
from that one we have to I think going on to that
route after a few years because the bigger
municipalities switch into those ones for the paid parking.
» So the chair at this point we haven't u sort of given consideration to paid
parking given that there is enough parking at this point. Um in the future
when we have if we have transit I think it sort of makes more sense for people
to carpool and u provides for a way for people to get here. Um, in the absence
of transit, I wouldn't necessarily recommend it, but that's a consideration
for future 100%. >> Thank you. So, I see within this though
that you're looking essentially though for a motion to receive for information,
meaning that essentially you'll be proceeding then with the alternative
parking strategy. Is that correct? >> So, the chair that would be correct.
» So, unless a counselor is wanting to go with options one, two, or three, then
accepting for information means that we that admin will proceed with the
alternative practice strategy. >> Okay. So, let's test that. Uh, with that
understanding, do I have a counselor that would like to make the motion to
receive this report for information? Councelor Nyan with the council accept
the city hall parking lot expansion options for information,
» comments, questions from council. Call for the vote
and that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Um, with that now we're going to go
to the staged approach of the intersection at Range Road 284 to
Chesmer Boulevard. Uh, also being presented by Mr. Jane Ahmed, uh, senior
project manager and Mr. Such Chanok, director of community growth and
infrastructure. Good afternoon again gentlemen.
» Good afternoon uh, Mayor Dean and members of council. Once again for the
record, my name is Sachant, director of community growth and infrastructure and
with me is Janeed Ahmed, senior project manager in our division. Uh we are here
to present Range Road 284 and Chester May Boulevard intersection upgrades. Uh
our recommendation to council is that council will accept this report uh for
information. Uh to give you a little bit of background in February of 2026,
council had passed a motion uh directing administration to bring forward report
on 28 uh range 284 and Chester Boulevard intersection by end of June 2026. And
that's the reason for why we are here. Uh this the intent of this motion as we
understood was to ensure that we keep proceeding with uh trying to find a
solution for that intersection uh to address the operational safety concerns
uh at that intersection. Since then council has uh had conversations about
the specific intersection in IMC [snorts] meetings uh where councilors
from city of Calgary were also present. uh council has also written a letter
through mayor to city of Calgary to work collaborately asking them to work
collaboratively with the uh city of Chester mayor's administration staff to
be able to address the solution address [clears throat] this problem since then
we have uh been in constant touch with the city of Calgary uh some of the last
meetings that we had were in June uh to be specific June 11th uh where we've
discussed some of the models uh surrounding that intersection with
city of Calgary. We've also proposed 50/50 cost sharing mechanism with them.
Uh Calgary does not seem to be on board with the cost sharing model but they are
uh open to operating and maintaining that
intersection improvement and signalization once it is done. uh we
have also been able to [clears throat] sort of come to certain level of
understanding uh surrounding the solution that can be uh constructed on
that intersection in terms of signalization that is still ongoing. The
conversation on that is still ongoing. Uh because we're still proceeding
through the conversations, we don't necessarily have a final idea of where
we are going to land. Uh all we are asking council is to give us a little
bit more time so that we can continue to work through this uh and bring forward a
final report to council to say this is what is happening at that intersection
and this is the solution that Calgary is on board with and this is the money that
we are going to be incurring when we implement the solution. Uh with that
said our recommendation to council is to accept this report uh for information uh
while we work through some of the solutions and allow us more time to come
back with a proposed solution and cost estimates for what is going to take to
improve that dissection. Great. Thank you. Uh with that, I'm
going to ask uh administration uh I'm going to ask council for us to move to
to a close session under section 29. Advice from officials, please. With
regards to this item, can I have a counselor make a motion, please, to move
into close session at 1:49 p.m. to discuss intersection at Range Road 284
to Chester Boulevard. Can I have a council make the following motion,
please? Councelor >> Certainly, your worship. I move that
council move into close session at 1:49 p.m. to discuss the following.
Intersection at Range Road 284 to Chester Boulevard. Access to information
act section 29. Advice from officials. >> Thank you. Call for the vote.
[snorts] >> And that's carried unanimously. Thank
you.
Thank you. Uh, just coming back from our closed session. Can I have a counselor
uh make the motion to come out of close session, please? Uh, C Deputy Mayor
Schindler. >> I move that council come out of close
session at 2:03 p.m. >> Thank you. Call for the vote.
» That's carried unsley. Thank you. As for our procedural bylaw, we'll take our
5minute break and come back at 210. Thanks everyone.
Good afternoon everyone. Just coming back from our break and continuing on
now with our discussion uh from uh with regards to the intersection at
Range Road 284 to Chesmer Boulevard. Uh council, were there any questions uh
with regards to uh the presentation? Okay, I have a quick one. So what's next
then? what would be uh what's the next step that we're looking at uh with
regards to the go forward and uh I guess is there any more commentary on that
piece about uh the not funding 50/50 because I thought my understanding
though is that in some ways is this not like a 50/50
intersection between us and Calgary. So I'm just wondering a little bit more
commentary uh with regards to that uh as well as what are our next steps uh
moving forward just so that we're really clear. Uh, director Chanok,
» thank you. Through the chair, to the chair. Um, uh, next steps we, our
request to council is that council accepts this as information and give us
some more time to be able to sort of work with Calgary and allow us to come
back with a more refined solution that would address the problem. Uh, with the
budget ask if there is any down the line. Um, that is our request to council
in terms of next steps. Um, in terms of 50/50 cost sharing, uh, my
understanding, and Janet might be able to, uh, add to it, is that they're not
open to the idea of 50/50. The intersection as it stands right now is
sort of 60/40, uh, 60% on our side, 40% on their side, but there'll be a part of
signalization that will happen in their boundary in their territory. And so u
our I guess ask of them was that let's because it's a share inter intersection
let's uh spread the cost uh which they don't seem to be on board with uh
because it's not a need at their end at this point. U Jed might be able to add a
little bit more onto this. >> Thank you so much S and through the
chair to the chair. Um what such has explained is exactly the same way the
reason we propose 50/50 again because it's an interim solution. it's going to
benefit both the cities. Uh whether we draw the city boundary line of 6040
right now that basically would play more in the role of the utility right of way
when the intersection gets developed uh to its ultimate capacity. Um since like
I said it's an interim solution and it's going to benefit both the city. That's
why it was proposed that we both split the cost. Um the approach that we have
uh looked into through their transportation team and myself being
involved with the discussion is we use uh a temporary solution of the wood span
and the wired span like we have on our Chelsea intersection as well. Um that is
the only viable solution that we have seen right now. We won't be going with
the concrete bases or a full metal post onto this one cuz that's going to be
part of the ultimate solution since it's right now temporary. That was the reason
that we proposed 50/50 to that which they are not very confident on it. But
what they have proposed is that they would provide their resources on to the
reviews as well as take on the operational cost of this intersection.
So anything that part of their operations in future as well once it's
built out for the interim solution they will basically take the ownership of the
operations of this one. [sighs]
So timelinewise uh would it be advisable for us? So I'm
just looking our next IMC meeting with Calgary is on September the 11th. Is
this a particular topic that we should bring to uh IMC on September the 11th?
Would would that in any way be beneficial moving forward
» through the chair? I'd recommend that you uh allow us some more time. If
you're able to come up with a solution, then perhaps it might not be a
conversation at the IMC. If not, then uh would inform council at which point
council can choose to put it on the IMC agenda.
So we >> we might be able to come up with a
solution prior to that. So >> yeah, [snorts] so we generally don't
need to or approve agenda items for IMC at a council meeting. So I wonder Mr.
Dreany, uh, if you can, uh, through, uh, through your role and through with, uh,
Miss Pro as, um, Interg uh, relations adviser, maybe we just
make a note of that uh, that this might be a possible topic of conversation at
that IMC. Maybe we just make note of that uh, to bring that forward to that
September 11th IMC. Okay. Thank you, uh, Councelor Grant.
» Thank you, Mayor Dean. Uh, one thing in the report that I would like to address,
um, is the taking over the operations after it's built. Um,
I don't know, I think most people know me by now and I like to re retain
control over such things. And the only reason, um, I'm bringing this up is is I
think about our current traffic light at Chesmmer Boulevard and Rainbow Road and
how that intersection used to be a really bad intersection for uh,
accidents. And what actually happened was council or maybe through council and
administration they were able to modify that signal to make it where you can't
turn um in front of oncoming traffic. So that's my concern is that if we have a
similar issue here at that at that traffic uh light are we able to address
it or do we have to ask someone else to address it
» through the council? Uh we will be able to address that thing but we will be
using city of Calgary to address those concerns. We'll be working with them on
the operations and uh the reason they propose it cuz they have the similar
configuration with the Alberta transportation on the deer traffic
lights and all the ones that led to the north on the Adri side as well. So
basically uh all those lights come under Alberta transportation
uh governance but city of Calgary operates on them. So they're proposing
the same structure because it's touching the boundary and that's what they want
to take in future as well for any uh boundary touching intersections with any
other municipalities that they have that they would use the same structure.
That's where this originated from. >> Okay. I think in that situation I'd be
more comfortable if there are 50/50 partner on that kind of situation. So
» we are pushing for the >> Thank you.
» Uh councelor Rando. >> Thank you your worship. So normally they
deny the 50 they don't want to share the cost obviously with other like
everywhere in the municipality always the boundary share somewhere. So how
that uh procedure work uh with other municipality and if council for example
our boundary share with for with the Calgary and if they ask the same thing
we deny and that it's done that's what it is or there is other procedure to
follow as well that's my one question first
» through the chair to councelor Randhava um a lot of this a lot of capital
projects would typically be identified through um ICFs so intermunicipal
collaboration framework would identify some of these projects and that would
define how we are going to be working with our neighbors to be able to
construct some of these capital projects. Uh the second layer that comes
into partnership is your inter municipal development plans which will also sort
of identify what will happen at which stage and which city is going to be
responsible for what kind of I guess planning and infrastructure design so to
say. Um so some of it is captured there. Outside of that it is primarily
negotiations with different cities. Um if it's our need then um I guess we can
advocate for them to sort of take over some of the cost. um at this point given
that they don't necessarily see much value in it, given that there's no
population on their side, um there might not be uh
enough value for them to spend on this intersection. Now, that is not to say
that we cannot uh ask for it. Uh we can't push for it. Whether or not do
they accept is ultimately their um choice, but uh we'll continue to
advocate for it. Thank you for the answer and the main main follow the next
one is uh for the intersection obviously there is uh collision happen and those
all so if that's just the concentration if administration through co can take it
uh right off for that one for time being until is properly built there the
intersection consider that side as well I'd be appreciate for that
» so the chair will will take that into consideration
Great. Thank you. Uh any other comments, questions from council before we accept
for information? Seeing none, can I have the motion to
accept the report for information, please? Uh council,
» let's move the council accept uh range road 284 and chastise into section
update for information. >> Comments, questions from council.
Call for the vote.
And that's K and Ashley. Thank you. >> So, chair, we're also u requesting that
uh council allow us to keep working on it and bring it back at a later date for
» Thank you. Can I have a council make the following motion, please?
» Deputy Mayor Schindler. I move that council approve an extension to the
reporting timeline of the staged approach of the intersection at Range
Road 284 to Chestir Boulevard report to allow administration to return with a a
comprehensive report including a proposed solution confirmed cost sharing
agreement with the city of Calgary and associated budget implications.
Uh thank you. Comments, questions from council. Call for the vote.
And that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes that
matter. Now moving to 10.5.3 which is which is the transitional rural
residential TRR district land use bylaw amendment first reading. Uh this was uh
tabled on April the 28th. So the first thing that we're going to need to do uh
is to lift this item from the table. So, uh Josh, if we could just have the
motion to lift this item from the table, please.
Can I have a counselor uh make the following motion, please?
Uh councelor Grant. [clears throat] Thank you, Mayor Dean. I move that
council lift from the table bylaw number 018-26
being the transitional rural residential district land use bylaw amendment.
» Thank you. Call for the vote.
That's carried unanimously. Thank you. Okay, with that, uh, this presentation
is being brought to us by Mr. Colin Kelly, Planner One. Good afternoon.
» Uh, good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Uh, yes, my name is Colin Kelly, planner
one with the community growth and infrastructure division. Uh, so before I
begin my presentation, uh, I would like to highlight that the bylaw in the
agenda package, uh, so 018-26, uh, does require changes to address the
amendments to schedule A of the land use bylaw. uh the bylaw attached to the
agend agenda package does not correctly align with the report that you have
provided. Uh and this bylaw that uh I'll be showing on the screen and have been
handed out uh corrects that error and ensures that the content of the bylaw uh
zero uh for 018-26 uh aligns with the report and the
presentation. Uh the amended bylaw can be uh legislative services can bring
that up on the screen um can be seen there as well as in the hard copies. Um
just a quick note with the hard copies. Uh you will note on the screen that
section three uh under section 3 3.5 has been removed uh just because as a part a
part of the uh template and just isn't required. So the only difference uh
between what you have printed and what is shown on the screen there um and the
difference between the bylaw that was in the agenda package um and what is on the
screen here is uh just the amendments to schedule A um where the report and this
presentation will speak to uh the existing transitional rural residential
uh parcels going to being redesated to country residential.
Thank you for letting me uh
before moving forward as always I would like to acknowledge that all my comments
pertaining to this presentation shall be made through the CAO to the mayor and
all members of council. uh administration is here to present a land
use bylaw amendment bylaw 018-26 to resend the transitional rural
residential district and to amend the land use district of three properties
within the north acreages community
sorry always forget I have this thank you
uh so just what we'll be going through in today's presentation
okay so uh please note that this presentation um has not been modified uh
since it was first first presented to council on April 28th um and that the
motion date for public hearing is now um incorrect. Uh the report provided as a
part of the council package has the correct dates and motions that I will
now read. Uh an administration is recommending the following motions. That
council give first reading to bylaw 018-26
amendments to bylaw 020-24 being the land use bylaw as amended. and
that council approved the scheduling of a public hearing for bylaw 018-26
for July 28th, 2026 at 100 p.m.
Okay. So, uh administration is proposing
amendments to the land use bylaw 020-24 as amended. Uh the proposed amendments
are to remove section 10.20 20 transitional rural residential district
and renumber subsequent districts and to amend schedule A of bylaw 020-24
being a land use bylaw as amended land use map by redesating lots 15 16 and 17
block 3 plan 2512036 from transitional rural residential to
country residential district. Um and that will be as shown in schedule A of
the bylaw.
So, as of February 2026, the country residential district was approved, which
provides an additional option for acreage subdivision. Uh, residents have
shared concerns regarding the transitional rural residential district,
which includes the need of for each of the off-site levy items to be paid at
the time of subdivision. So, uh, water, sanitary, and storm water. Um, in
addition, shadow plans and the need to demonstrate the ability to transition to
increased density have been noted uh as an issue in discussion uh with acre
acreage uh property owners.
Uh so this slide uh shows the purpose statement from section 10.20
transitional rural residential district in the land use bylaw. As noted, the
intention of the district from its inception was to demonstrate not only
the transition from larger properties to a minimum wet acre, but to also show how
these properties could subsequently transition to a more dense urban form of
development with full water, sanitary, and storm water services. Uh this does
not align with the intent of acreage owners seeking to only subdivide to one
acre properties and there is no guarantee that these owners will further
transition to a higher density in the future.
This information is also from section 10.20 transitional rural residential
district in the land use bylaw and is to ill illustrate the embedded requirements
for shadow planning and storm water requirements that restrict parcels to a
minimum 1acre lot area. If an application does not demonstrate the
noted requirements showing the potential future locations of dwellings, property
lines and roads in a shadow plan uh then the requirements of the TRR district are
not uh are not met.
And so this is um this slide shows the city of Chesmmeir
offsite uh off-site levy bylaw. Uh please note that since uh this item was
first presented and tabled, this has been updated. Uh in principle uh it is
all the same as far as country residential district uh being able to
have water sanitary and storm uh deferred.
Um but those numbers have subsequently changed. So for area 9 uh for the
transitional rural residential district uh it is 493,278
for area 13 438,747 area 142,483
and for area 2242143
um and with those deferred as they may be done for country residential the
total for each of those areas would be 195,327
uh so increased numbers based on the newer off-site levy bylaw. Uh but the
same principle as the transitional rural residential
district is a transitional district and contemplates additional future density.
Each off-site levy bucket including water, sanitary, and storm water are
included through conversations with acreage owners that have interest in
reszoning their properties. Uh this has been noted as a concern from these
owners as these services are not being constructed to their properties as part
of the application they are submitting at this time. The country residential
district on the hand on the other hand allows for water sanitary and storm
water levies levies to be deferred as the country residential district
resolves this concern for acreage donors uh that seek to subdivide prior to
municipal servicing uh administration believes that TR is no longer required
to remain in the land use bylaw as a district.
So currently within the city of Chestmir, there are only three
sidebyside lots designated as trans transitional rural residential. Uh
should council choose to rescend the district, these lots will need to be
resated to a different land use district. There are three other
residential land use districts to amend to these lands uh that do not require
full municipal services. That is the large lot rural residential district,
rural residential district, and country residential district. Uh at the time of
subdivision of these lots, off-site levies uh were deferred since two of the
three lots already had buildings on them and the policy allowed for a deferment
of off-site levies for one lot. Uh this deferment of off-site levies aligns with
the country residential district. Um though the country residential district
requires a lot width of 50 meters, which two of the three existing transitional
rural residential parcels do not comply with. uh these properties otherwise meet
the requirements of the land use bylaw uh such as the minimum uh lot size
setbacks and building heights in the country residential. Uh in addition, the
large lot rural residential district and rural residential district are intended
to remain as they existed when they were uh annexed uh which does not meet the
intent of those districts. For these three existing TR parcels,
further subdivision would require properties to be resoneed from either
TRR or country residential to an urban residential district. um as they are
already near the minimum permitted lot size in both of these districts. Uh this
means that the reasonzoning of these lands from transitional rural
residential to country residential does not impact the process for subsequent
development as they would need to be reszoned to one of the urban residential
districts in either case.
Uh for implications uh there will be one remaining land use district the country
residential district which allows for acreage subdivision uh that does not
require municipal water sanitary and storm water infrastructure to be
provided. Um the existing transitional rural residential district parcels will
need to be amended to a different existing land use district uh if the
district is rescended. Um and this addresses the concerns that have been
noted uh by acreage owners with the transitional rural residential district
um in that they require off-site levy payments for water sanitary and storm
water infrastructure uh which cannot be deferred and they need to demonstrate
the ability to transition to urban density through shadow planning which
has been difficult for acre donors that do not wish to subdivide further.
recommendations. Uh, administration recommends proceeding with the first
reading and scheduling a public hearing for the resinment of the transitional
rural residential district to obtain feedback from residents.
Uh, here to answer any questions if you have any.
» Thank you. Because this is first reading, typically what we've been uh
doing uh is uh passing proceedings so that we can allow for the debate and
those sorts of things to happen. I just want to clarify
process-wise, if we were to vote no on first reading
of this, essentially that would just leave TRR as a district. Is that
correct? >> Uh through the chair to the chair. Yes.
» So the consequence of that would be >> um that the transitional rural
residential district would not be resented from the land use bylaw.
» Right. Um and admin would like to see it removed
at this time. Yes. Um that is the proposal
administration is bringing forward for uh the reasons noted in the
presentation. >> So the voting on first reading right now
so the voting on first reading right now simply would then allow for this
conversation to then continue uh go to public hearing where public input could
then happen um but does not necessarily demonstrate council's support for or
against said bylaw but rather opens up the conversation for that to happen.
Would that be a fair assessment of what voting on this first reading and any
first reading? Uh, but just given some of the commentary that we've heard even
today as part of public input, I'm just anticipating
likely comments that will show up in the mayor's email in the next 20 minutes.
Uh, so I just wanted to clarify uh just from a process standpoint. Mr. Chandio,
» through the chair to the chair, uh, you're correct. The only uh I guess
contemplation that happen if council chooses to let
through this uh to approve first reading is that you as council are willing to
listen to the concerns of the public uh through public hearing process. Uh
you're willing to allow administration uh to present their thoughts on it and
uh you're open to a conversation in terms of asking questions and gathering
input. uh by virtue of you approving first reading. It does not necessarily
mean that council is supporting it or not supporting it. This is only to say
that you're open to this conversation and you'd like to hear more about it
from public from council uh from administration and would like to seek
more information. Um until you've made a decision which is uh at this third
reading uh typically it's not contemplated that any of the counselors
or council in general is in support of this or not. Your decision decides what
council's final verdict is >> cuz voting no on first reading stops
conversation >> through the chair. If you turn this down
at this point, it'll this this project or this resentment
would die. >> Right. Okay. Thank you. So, I just
wanted to provide that clarity for council because I know that it's a
internal conversation I've been having. I can also like I said already
anticipate uh the emails that I will be receiving this week. Uh and so I thank
you for that clarity. I just uh that was more for public's benefit if you will in
that uh this does not even demonstrate a bias one way or the other from council
with regards to the uh approval of this first reading should it pass but rather
opens up that opportunity for further conversation uh as per even some of the
conversations we were having uh this morning which already seems a long time
ago uh during public input. Okay, with that uh are there any other questions
with regards to the presentation? Councelor Randawa.
» Thank you, your worship. >> Thank you, your worship. I have only the
clarity question. The motion is requested uh to schedule the public
hearing May 26, 2020 or is it July 28th? What you said?
» July. >> Okay, that's good then. Thank you.
» Okay. Okay. Can I have the motion then for uh to pass first reading, please?
Can I have a councelor McFallin motion, please?
Councelor and Ryan just move the council give
first reading to bylaw number 018-26 being the transitional rural residential
district land use bylaw amendment. Thank you. Uh comments, questions of council
call for the vote.
That's carried unanimously. Thank you. With that then we can go ahead now and
book the public hearing. Can I have a counselor make the motion to book the
public hearing, please? Uh, councelor [snorts] Randawa.
» Thank you, your worship. I move that the council approve the schedule of a public
hearing for bylaw number 018-26 for July 28th, 2026 at 100 p.m.
» Thank you. Comments, questions from councel.
Call for the vote.
Thank you. With that now carried and given uh the comments that were made
both by myself and director Shannok, I want to reiterate comments that were
made this morning during the public input session that if you have feedback
now that you would like to have officially go on record, including
records that may have been handed to counselors as part of public input, if
you would like that to be part of the official record of this conversation,
then I encourage you now to follow uh the public hearing uh process and the
collection of that uh information and to either attend and in person um or via
phone uh on July 28th at 1 p.m. as part of the public hearing process. Great.
Thank you. Okay. Now, we're going to go to 10.5.4,
which is direct control DP number 26 220102102-288
Kenberg Boulevard permitted use. Presented by Shaman Vino, manager of
development and building services. And Obina. Oh, you threw a new name at me.
This is unfair. Unfair when you throw a new name at the mayor without the
preparation. >> Okay, Oena, I'm going to give this a
shot and I apologize in advance. And I'm and I'm going to take a swing because I
got Esso down now, right? I've I've got that one figured out. So, here we go.
So, Obina uh Usuzima. >> Perfect.
» Yes. >> Slow clap everyone. Slow clap.
» So excited right now. Thanks buddy. Uh, planning and development technician too.
Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council. Um,
thank you for the introduction. And yes, for the record, Chairman Vento,
development manager, community growth and infrastructure. With me at the
gallery is Obina Usuzima, uh, file manager, development technician too for
this development permit. Before I move forward, I'd like to note that all of my
comments will be made through the CEO to your worship and to all members of
council. Um, before council today is a
development permit application DP26-22028102
for unit 102 at 288 Kberg Boulevard. The application is for a tenant improvement
to convert an existing vacant commercial unit into an office. The property is
zoned within Kenny Commercial Plaza and is zoned direct control based on the
local commercial district. Under this district offices is listed as a
permitted use as the site is zoned direct control. Council is the
development approving authority and therefore the decision maker on this
application. The application was received as a
complete application on May 22nd, 2026. No exterior changes are proposed to the
building. The application is limited to the conversion of an existing vacant
tenant space to an office use within the existing commercial plaza. From a land
use perspective, the primary consideration for this application is
parking. Under the land use bylaw, office use requires one parking stall
per 37 square meters of gross floor area. The proposed office space is
approximately 100 square meters, resulting in a requirement for three
parking stalls. administration reviewed the parking
supply for the overall commercial development. When the plaza was
originally approved in 2014, 72 parking stalls were provided,
although 50 stalls were only required. With the proposed office use, the site
will continue to maintain a surplus of 12 parking stalls. As a result, the
development complies with the parking requirements of the land use bylaw and
no variance is requested. administration has reviewed the proposal
and determined that one offices is a permitted use in the direct control
district. No exterior alterations are proposed. Parking requirements are
satisfied. No variances are required for this application and the proposal is
compatible with the existing commercial plaza and surrounding area. The
surrounding area consists of a mix of existing commercial development,
residential use, a playground, and a school. Administration does not
anticipate any adverse impacts to the adjacent properties as a result of the
proposed use. Therefore, administration is recommending that council approve
development permit DP26-22028102
for a permitted use office at unit 10288 Kennyberg Boulevard subject to the
conditions attached in attachment B. I would be happy to answer any questions
from council now. >> Great. Thank you. Uh any comments or
questions from council with regards to uh the proposed uh development permit?
Seeing none, can I have the motion please for council to approve
development permit 0262202 028102.
Councelor Andawa. >> Thank you your worship. I move that the
council approved the development permit 26-222028102
as submitted subject to the condition of approval outline in attachment B.
» Thank you. Comments, questions from councel.
Call for the vote.
» That's carried unanimously. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Thank you. Appreciate
it. >> Okay.
Uh we're now going to go to bylaw 028-26,
Clearwater Park Split Zoning Land Use bylaw Amendment. First reading,
presented by Mr. JP Lllair, planner one. Good afternoon.
[clears throat]
Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. Uh for the record, my name is JP JPlair,
planner one, uh community growth and infrastructure division.
I will be presenting a request for decision speaking on the land use bylaw
amendment for lot one block 2 plan 2412540
in Clearwater Park for split zoning. Recommendations to council that council
give first reading to bylaw 02 826 being amendments to bylaw 020-24
being the land use bylaw as amended and that council approve the scheduling of a
public hearing for bylaw 028-26 for July 14th, 2026 at 10:00 a.m.
The subject [snorts] property is in Clearwater Park at the intersection of
Chester Boulevard and Clearwater Passage as shown in attachment A. And maybe if
we could bring up that attachment A as the map while I'm speaking that might be
uh easier. Currently the lot is vacant and is
splitzoned i.e. there is or sorry it has two different land use zones that
regulate development. The northern portion
is zoned as direct control residential multi-unit district known as DCR3 and
the southern portion is zoned as residential multi-unit district
uh known as R3. Given that the development authority for
the portion that is zoned direct control is council and that the development
authority for the land zoned R3 is administration.
Rendering development decisions on a split zone lot is challenging. Another
challenge is challenge is determining the exact boundary of the bordering two
land use zones as the zoning is conceptual and was never based on
surveyed boundaries. In consideration of this, administration
is recommending that council redesate the entire subject property as one land
use zone. Um being option one shown in bylaw sorry
sorry the bylaw shown in attachment B. Uh that would be all resident all to to
the whole zone to residential bylaw sorry to residential multi-unit district
R3 and the option two as shown in attachment C the whole uh lot as direct
control residential multi-unit district DCR3
reszoning the entire subject property to residential
uh multi-unit district R3 would allow administration to render decisions on
development applications ations. This would allow development
applications to proceed through the standard development and building permit
approval processes, eliminating the need for individual
council approvals and providing builders with a more streamlined and consistent
approval process. Well, zoning zoning to direct control DCR3 would require
council to consider development applications having oversight
of development on these lands. This is in relation to February 20 26. An
application uh was before council on behalf of the owners to change the
number of stories in the R3 district and to reszone the entire subject property
to residential multi-unit district R3. This was denied by council.
However, given the complex complexities uh that I've noted around decision-
making uh on the split zoning on this parcel, administration is bringing
bringing this forward to clarify that and define the uh development authority
for the whole subject property. That concludes my uh presentation and
we're happy to answer any questions from council. Thank you.
» Right. So again, like we just uh did with one a moment ago, this would be for
first reading to for this to come forward and then we'd book a public
hearing for open debate. Is that correct on what we're doing here? Thank you. Uh
but the proposal would be obviously then to sorry the proposal is to go to all R3
and so that it would be more consistent with even recent decisions that have
been made by council should this pass. Okay. Uh director Chanok
» through the chair. Our proposal or recommendation is that council consider
one zoning across the entire lot, be it R3 or DC. Thank you.
» That's a decision for council to make. All we're recommending is council
consider reszoning the entire lot to one zone.
» And that would be done then at as part of the public hearing process
» as part of debate second and third >> through the chair. Yes.
» Great. Thank you. Okay. So, at this time, we're just going to give first
reading so it can go to public hearing so we can debate this on July the 14th.
Great. Can I have a counselor make the motion to give first reading to bylaw
028-26, please? Councelor Grant. >> Thank you, Mayor Dean. I move that
council give first reading to bylaw number 028-26 being the Clearwater Park
split zoning land use bylaw amendment. Comments, questions from councel. Call
for the vote.
That's carried unanimously. Thank you. And can I have the motion for public
hearing, please? Councelor Randawa.
» Thank you, your worship. I move that the council approve the schedule for public
hearing for bylaw number 028-26 for July 14, 2026 at 10:00 a.m.
» Thank you. Comments, questions from councel. Call for the vote.
And that's Charity and Ashley. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Uh ledge services,
I'm going to throw you a curveball here. We're going to skip to 10.6.2, two,
which is city of Chesmmer's official land acknowledgement. Uh, and this one
is being presented by Miss Dennis. So, um, Director Dennison is coming to, uh,
present the city of Chester's official land use acknowledgement ledge services.
The reason I'm doing this is what I would like to do is depending on the
timeline of this, I know that we have a guest coming uh, at uh, 3:00. I'd love
to try and go into one in camera session uh because I know that there's an in
camera session that's attached to yours. So, what I would love to try and do is
see if we can get these two done then go [snorts] into in camera for both items
and then come out of in camera with any motions thereof also then what would be
related back to 10.6.1. So, that's why I'm making a quick change here to try
and accomplish one in camera session instead of two. So, Miss Dennis,
» good afternoon. Mayor Council, the item before you today is the proposed
official land acknowledgement for the city of Chester. Administration is
recommending that council adopt this land acknowledgement as the corporate
standard for all staff representing the city at public events and official
functions. This work is intended to provide
consistency across the organization and ensure that when the city acknowledges
Treaty7 territory, it is done respectfully, appropriately, and with a
shared standard. There are no financial implications associated with this
recommendation and if adopted, legislative services will make the
official land acknowledgement available corporatewide so staff have consistent
wording to use when representing the city on city business. The proposed land
acknowledgement reads as follows. In the spirit of respect, reciprocity and
truth, we honor and acknowledge Mojinstus and the traditional treaty 7
territory and oral practices of the Blackfoot Confederacy, Sika, Gai, Beani,
Ethka, Nakod nations, Chiniki, Bearspaw, Good Stony, and Sutina Nation. We
acknowledge that this territory is home of the Otim
I always get this one wrong. O to Pimwak uh Matei government of the Matei nation
[snorts] within Alberta District 4. Finally, we acknowledge all nations
indigenous and non who live, work and play on this land and who honor and
celebrate this territory. This sacred gathering place provides
us with an opportunity to engage in and demonstrate leadership on reconciliation
and we are honored to have you join us on Treaty 7 territory. With that
administration is seeking council's approval to adopt this as the city of
Chestir's official land acknowledgement. >> Thank you. Uh so then
in simplicity's [snorts] uh sake for simplicity sake basically
the one that I read every day not every day the one I read for every council
meeting would be the one that if we are doing any kind of a meeting public
meeting or things like that those would be the ones that would be read by
counselors who may be chairing a meeting by our chairs that are chairing meetings
and also by any staff that are attending any kind of a public meeting that we
have one standardized land acknowledgement that we are using. Is
that correct? >> That is correct. Fantastic. Makes a lot
of sense to me. Okay. Any comments or questions from council with regards to
this. All right. With that, uh, can I have the
motion to adopt, uh, the official land acknowledgement, uh, as a corporate
standard for all staff requesting the city of Chester public events and
official functions.
Uh, can I I would like to see a wording on this standard for all staff and city
representatives.
That's public events, comma, official functions,
comma, and committee meetings.
Okay. Uh, council, any other questions with regards to the wording? I see
lights. Where are those for wording or you just want to make the motion?
Motion. You give it to the mo. Okay. Uh, councelor
» Thank you. Worship. I move that council adopt the official land acknowledgement
as a corporate standard for all staff and city representatives representing
the city of Chester at public events, official functions, and committee
meetings. >> Thank you. Comments, questions from
council. Call for the vote.
And that's carried uni. Thank you. Sorry, Miss Dennis. Before you run, uh
just a quick question. about how this will be now communicated
out to uh the listed parties, whether that be our community chair, our
committee chairs, like so for all of our committees as well as staff. Uh what
does communication and followup now uh look like? And even everybody receiving
a copy of this, what what does this practically look like now that that
motion has passed? What this practice looks like is that we will have our
legislative services team ensure that it is available to everyone, including the
phonetics, not just the spelling, uh, to assist people with making sure that this
land acknowledgement occurs where we said it will.
» Great. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Okay.
And now we're going to go back to 10.6.1,
which is public member committee appointments. And this is being
presented by Miss Emily Emily White, legislative assistant 2. Good afternoon.
Uh, good afternoon, Mayor and Council. I'm Emily White, and today we
administration are just looking for three motions to appoint individuals to
the seniors advisory committee, grant adjudication, and the lake and watershed
advisory committee. Um so just before a quick background and before I ask for a
motion to move into close session um there are a few vacancies across a
couple of committees and we are bringing forward a couple applications to these
three committees as we do have a couple confirmed members who are interested in
being a part of these committees. Um so administration has reached out to them
and do their due diligence sure that they are um still interested and wanting
to participate in these committees. Um at the current moment there is one
vacancy on the senior's advisory committee and we have one application
which will be presented. Uh the grant adjudication currently has three
vacancies and we have one interested public member and the lake and watershed
advisory committee currently has three uh vacancies and we are looking to
appoint two members to that um committee. Further this um if as you can
see um if we have insignificant applications administration does
continue to advertise um for these vacancies whether that's through social
media um website posts through their news flash or just a popup. Um we do do
that and we're constantly um reviewing them and receiving them and we review
them as we receive them. Um, and if there isn't any further questions upon
this, I will just be looking to a motion to move into close session as we don't
um, evaluate committee members in a public forum.
» And these particular applications that came in, sorry, [snorts] these
particular applications that we have, these are people that had previously
applied. We possibly didn't have like these are previous applications for
these committees. Is that correct? >> Um, for the most part, yes, there is one
that has is a new application that you'll be receiving.
» Okay, great. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So, with that, uh we'll go into close
session, but I would like to call for the motion to have both um items from
the close session and we'll handle both uh in close uh and then come out um
after close and then we'll be able to finish up uh both items and then uh move
to uh council as a chairman of the meeting. So, uh can I have uh council
make the motion uh to uh move into close session, please?
» [clears throat] >> Councelor Randawa.
» Thank you, your worship. I move that the council move into close session at 2:57
p.m. to discuss the following public member committee appointments access to
information act section 22 confidential evaluation and quarterly legal update
access to information act section 29 advice from officials.
» Thank you. Call for the vote.
That's K. Thank you.
» [laughter] >> Good afternoon everyone. We are just
coming back from our closed session and so can I have a uh counselor make the
motion to uh come out of our closed session please?
Sorry. [laughter] Good afternoon everyone. We are just
coming back from our close session and so can I have a
uh Deputy Mayor Schindler? >> Um I move that we come out of close
session at 4:02 p.m. >> Thank you. Call for the vote.
Uh that motion is carried. We'll take our uh 5m minute break and come back at
4:08. Thanks everybody.
Good afternoon everyone. Uh just coming back from our break here. We just have a
couple of motions uh here to end off our day. Can I have uh councelor make the
following motion to accept the quarterly legal update for information, please?
Uh councelor Grant. Thank you, Mayor. I move that council accept the quarterly
legal update for information. Comments, questions for council. call for the
vote.
And that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh and then we just have a couple
of appointments to make for committees. Can I have a counselor make the
following motion, please? Uh Deputy Mayor Schindler.
» I move that council appoint Cheryl Butterly to the senior's advisory
committee effective June 23rd, 2026 with a term ending December 31st, 2026.
» Thank you. Comments, questions from councel.
Call for the vote.
» That's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh can I have a council make the
following motion please? Councelor Nyan move that council appoint Vicki Minhouse
to the grant adjudication committee effective June 23rd 2026 with a term
ending December 31st 2026. >> Comments questions from councel.
Call for the vote.
I'm sorry, >> I can't vote on this.
» Sorry, I can't vote on this. >> Sorry,
» Deputy Mayor. >> Sorry, I can't vote on this. I have a
conflict of interest on this uh on this vote. I just realized that and I'm
sorry.
Okay. Uh so with the declaration of conflict of interest, then we just don't
accept the vote and then we can uh just keep going. So, we've already had the
vote. So, uh thank you. That's carried unanimously. Uh and
uh can I have uh a councilor make the following motion, please?
» Uh councelor >> Certainly. [clears throat] Your worship.
I move that council appoint the following public members to the lake and
watershed advisory committee effective June 23rd, 2026. Holly McDonald and Ron
Ride out with a term ending December 31st, 2026.
» Thank you. Comments, questions from council.
call for the vote
and that's carried unanimously. Thank you. Uh just before we wrap up here, uh
going to through our city alleged services, how will we be uh reaching out
and informing uh our members that are now going to be joining our comm our
committee uh ledge services. >> Uh thank you your worship and to you and
the rest of council. Um so all the appointments and the individuals who are
appointed today uh they will be reached out via email just as a
congratulatoratory email. Um and from there we will let the administrative
leaison know about these appointments and they will also be the administrative
leaison will also reach out to these individuals just alerting them of when
their next committee meeting is and any other um supplementary documentation
they would need such as the terms of reference for their review.
» Thank you. Uh okay. Uh with that uh unless uh councelor has any new
business. Seeing none uh we'll get the motion to adjurnn. Can I have the motion
to adjurnn, please? Councelor Randawa. >> Thank you your worship. I move that the
council adjourn the meeting at 4:13 p.m. >> Thank you. Comments, questions from
council. Call for the vote.
And that's carried unanimously. Thank you.