[2:51] We have started, if we could. Give them one more

[2:58] minute. We're just checking.

[3:31] So. I will call. Can I start the meeting then,

[3:36] Madam clerk? Yes, mayor. Okay, thank you. So we will

[3:41] call the strategic prior. The committee meeting to order. And.

[3:51] I'm just going to bring that. The council standing committee

[3:56] meeting to order. And we'll start off with the territorial

[4:05] land acknowledgment, the city. Of Port Moody carries out our

[4:07] business on the ancestral and unseated homelands of the quaketlum

[4:10] slail with tooth musk. Kate Quantlin, Kikate and Solo peoples

[4:17] and extend depreciation for the opportunity to work on this

[4:20] territory. Next item is adoption of the agenda. Go. Moved

[4:25] and moved and seconded. All in favor? Opposed. Carrie. Thank

[4:29] you. Next item is public input. So as a reminder

[4:32] to members of the public, while we encourage civic engagement

[4:35] and welcome your participation in the public portion of our

[4:37] meetings, There are expectations regarding appropriate conduct in decorum at

[4:41] council meetings. We ask all members of the public to

[4:44] ensure that matters raised with council are constructively focused on

[4:47] issues and not individuals and that any engagement with or

[4:51] about city staff or council is addressed in a manner

[4:53] that is consistent with these expectations so that we can

[4:57] all engage in this space in a manner that. Is

[4:59] respectful and constructive and abides by the. City's respectful communications

[5:05] policy and respectful workplace policy. So, having said that, Madam

[5:10] Clerk, do we. Have any members of the public, any

[5:14] participants. Thank you, Mary Lodi. There is no one in

[5:17] the park view room. However, there are folks in the

[5:19] online with no hands up. All right, so. Anyone who's

[5:22] online. And if you have any input, please raise your

[5:27] hand and we will call on you. This is your

[5:30] opportunity to provide input. I see one hand. Okay, we

[5:35] have Kaylin blonde camp. Welcome. Please state your name in

[5:40] city of residence and you will have two minutes. Thank

[5:44] you, mayor and council. Good afternoon, mayor and council. My

[5:47] name is Kaylin Blomcamp. And I'm a director of development

[5:50] at West Group Properties. I'm speaking tonight as a follow

[5:52] up to the letter Westgroup submitted to council on July

[5:55] 7. On October 3, 2023 council passed a motion stating,

[5:59] and I quote, that once the coronation park rezoning has

[6:01] been approved, the city and Westgroup begin to explore how

[6:04] to incorporate. Affordable housing in all phases of the application

[6:07] as prescribed in the letter of intent for as many

[6:08] affordable housing opportunities on the site as possible. That opportunity

[6:13] is now here. And this will be council's last opportunity

[6:16] within their term to. Make this a reality. With support

[6:19] from CMHC, we have a chance to bring 342 secured.

[6:22] Rental homes to Port Modi, including 85 affordable units. This

[6:25] represents more than three times the current rental requirement for

[6:27] this master plan, with 25% of the homes designated as

[6:30] affordable. The CMH. CMHC opportunity allows us to secure low

[6:34] cost. Financing on over $200 million in loan funding. It's

[6:38] a program available now, but there's no guarantee it will

[6:40] remain available in the future. It is one of the

[6:43] most impactful housing initiatives in Canada and in today's market

[6:46] is the primary reason that rental and affordable housing projects

[6:49] are moving forward at all. To secure this allocation, we

[6:52] need to provide clear direction. On a path forward today

[6:55] without this funding. We will face significant delays in delivering

[6:57] building two and its associated amenities, including childcare. As we

[7:00] will need to launch building two into a presale program

[7:03] for which there is currently no viable market or sign

[7:06] of recovery. We've met similarly ambitious timelines in other municipalities

[7:10] by applying creative solutions. It takes coordination and commitment, but

[7:13] we're confident we can do it here. In Port Moody

[7:15] today. We ask that council support our commitment to bringing

[7:18] rental and affordable housing to port Moody by providing clear

[7:20] direction to staff to identify a path forward which meets

[7:24] CMHC's deadlines to secure this important allocation. Thank you for

[7:27] your time. Thank you for that input. Kaylin is there.

[7:31] Anybody else that wishes to address council at this time.

[7:35] I'll call a second time. Is there anybody that wishes

[7:37] to address council at this time? I see. Steve Milani.

[7:42] Please state your name and city of residence for the

[7:44] record. And you? Will have two minutes. Thank you. Go

[7:48] ahead. Please

[7:58] state your name and city of residence for the record.

[8:01] And you will have two minutes. Please proceed. Go ahead,

[8:04] Steve. Seems to be a problem with Steve's microphone. Is

[8:13] there anybody else that wishes to address council at this

[8:15] time while he is working on. His. Issues.

[8:28] Just thinking about that too. Mayor. If you like, we

[8:34] can message Mr. Milani to give him the phone in

[8:38] option. If that suits council. So we'll have our team

[8:42] connect with them right now it'll. Just take a minute,

[8:46] Mr. Milani, our team will reach out momentarily. They'll give

[8:50] you a phone number and you can phone it in.

[8:52] Steve. In the meantime, is there anybody else that wishes

[8:55] to address council?

[9:10] Okay, well, while we're waiting. There was something really amazing

[9:19] happened last night at about 11:30 p.m. Our own Callan

[9:27] Morrison became a father again, and he and his wife,

[9:32] Jessica, welcomed beautiful Charlotte. Rose Morrison into the world just

[9:37] over £8 9oz. And she's a very healthy, happy little

[9:42] baby, so. They're enjoying their time together, and hopefully. They'll

[9:48] be able to come home tomorrow from the hospital. And

[9:51] we do wish Callan and Jessica and little baby Eevee

[9:54] and little baby Charlie. All the best. And congratulations to

[9:58] them. Can we ask

[10:08] if there was any written submissions while we wait for

[10:11] Mr. Milani, Madam Clerk? Are there any written submissions? We

[10:17] can't do that. We have to close verbal first. We're

[10:22] still working on connecting there. Hello. Steve. Please state your

[10:31] name in city of residence for the record, and you

[10:33] will have two minutes. Thank you for being so patient.

[10:37] Oh, this is working now. Okay. Yeah. Steve Milani, Port

[10:41] Moody. Sorry, I didn't have much time to prepare. Good

[10:44] evening. My name, as I said, is Steve Milani. I'm

[10:47] here tonight to speak against moving. Forward with the Kyle

[10:49] center redevelopment as proposed and to raise concern about the

[10:53] OCP process first. On Cal center spending half a million

[10:57] dollars just for the preliminary designs and estim. Estimates, followed

[11:01] by another 2 million for a detailed design before even

[11:04] committing to construction. That's simply not responsible. We know, for

[11:08] example, it's like Burnaby. Once the richest municipality in Canada.

[11:12] These kinds of recreation projects can spiral out of control

[11:16] quickly. Bernabee had to cancel their confed park community center

[11:20] because it became unaffordable and the CG Brown replacement is

[11:23] taking forever. It's cost of skyrocketed. If it can happen

[11:27] there, it can happen here. The 30 to 40 million

[11:31] estimate for call center it's not realistic. It'll end up

[11:33] costing 50% more, maybe even double, and. The residents will

[11:37] pay for it through long term debt and tax increases.

[11:41] The previous council had already approved a more affordable solution,

[11:45] renovate the existing cal center. That was the right move,

[11:48] and I urged this council to go back to it

[11:50] before we get into too much trouble on the OCP.

[11:53] The process has been deeply flawed right from the start.

[11:58] The draft shows clearly that the council. This council is

[12:01] not listening to the community. People see it and they're

[12:04] tired of it. Consultation is meaningless. If public feedback is

[12:09] ignored. We can and should do better, both in how

[12:12] we manage projects like Cal center and how we shape

[12:15] the future of our city through the OCP update process.

[12:20] Thank you. Thank you. Is there anybody else that wishes

[12:24] to speak to council at this time? I'll call a

[12:28] second time. Anybody who wishes to speak to council third

[12:34] and final time seeing none will close this portion of

[12:38] the public input. And we will go to written submissions.

[12:42] Madam Clerk, do we have any written submissions? No written

[12:45] submissions. This evening. Thank you. Next item is. Adoption of

[12:51] the minutes. Is there a mover? Moved and. Seconded. All

[12:58] in favor? Opposed. Carrie. Thank you. All right, so we

[13:02] are going to recess now just so that anyone who's

[13:05] watching. Is aware we are only going into two committee

[13:09] meetings tonight. We'll start off with city initiatives and planning,

[13:12] and then we'll go into strategic priorities. So at this

[13:16] time, we will recess. And I will give the chair

[13:21] over to councilor Delworth. Take it away, councilor. You would

[13:27] think after four years I would get this microphone thing

[13:30] right. Thank you. It is 05:11 p.m. and I'm calling

[13:35] the city initiatives and planning committee meeting to order. We

[13:39] have an agenda, and I do believe that. There is

[13:43] an amendment. An additional item on the agenda. Ms. Lamb.

[13:51] Thank you, chairperson. That's correct. Included in the ontable package.

[13:56] Will be a new proposed item, 4.4, titled a West

[13:59] group letter to council exploring adding affordability at inlet district.

[14:04] Thank you. Would someone like to move our agenda as

[14:06] amended? I see. That moved and seconded. All in favor?

[14:12] Carried. Thank you. We have minutes. We have minutes of

[14:14] our last seafic meeting of June. 17, here for adoption.

[14:18] Sorry. I see. Ms. Lamb, your hand is up. And,

[14:21] Mayor Lottie, I. Also see. Okay. Apologies. I lowered my

[14:24] hand as well. Thank you. So we do have the

[14:27] minutes of June 17, and I would certainly entertain a

[14:30] motion to adopt those. I see that moved. And seconded.

[14:37] Any amendments. All in favor? Harry. Thank you. I hope

[14:41] we're all settled in. We've got a very ambitious agenda,

[14:46] councilor eggdrap. Maybe I'm getting ahead here, but I'm recusing.

[14:50] Myself for item 4.1 due to. Well, I've never been

[14:53] a part of this discussion, so no need to start

[14:56] now due to my family business being located in that

[14:58] area. Thank. You. Your timing is perfect. We are moving

[15:03] into item 4.1. Moody Center, Spring Street. Streetscape design guidelines

[15:10] follow up, and we do have a presentation. And clerk,

[15:15] will you remind. To get councilor egg to rep back

[15:23] when we're finished with this. Yes, chair. Great. I'm looking

[15:28] for a presentation from the manager of development planning and

[15:31] manager of infrastructure. Engineering services. I see Mr. Judd. And

[15:36] I see Mr. Wu. Are you both doing this presentation?

[15:48] Through the mayor, the presentation. Will be done by both

[15:55] me and Wesley. I'm just trying to bring up my

[15:59] slides. Sorry.

[16:33] It says you've started. There we go. And you were

[16:36] in full presentation mode, so take it away. All right.

[16:41] Good evening, mayor and council. Tonight I'll be presenting the

[16:44] spring street design guidelines. This presentation outlines.

[16:56] Chairperson. It looks like Mr. Jet has frozen. I'm not

[17:04] sure if Mr. Judge can hear. He should perhaps leave

[17:07] in and join back. In. We will send Mr. Jet

[17:11] a message to let him know that we can no

[17:14] longer hear him. We can see him frozen, though.

[17:45] Okay, so we are waiting for Mr. Judd to come

[17:48] back in, sharing his screen, hopefully not frozen. If that

[17:57] doesn't happen, Mr. Wu, we're going to put you in

[17:59] a little spot of pressure.

[18:20] Sorry, chair. I might ask if the clerk have a

[18:22] copy that we can put up to assist. In that

[18:24] way. At least we're getting that started. Well, I can

[18:26] do it. Yes, we can go ahead and we can

[18:31] pull that up. In the meantime, we'll try. To connect

[18:32] with Mr. We are continuing to try to connect with

[18:35] Mr. Judge. Thanks. I guess I have a question that

[18:39] we've had two technical issues in the first 15 minutes

[18:43] of this meeting. Is this something that's occurring at our

[18:45] end or. Is this just a bad day for everybody?

[18:53] Thank you, chairperson. It's hard to say, but I would

[18:58] guess that it might be. On the other person's end.

[19:03] Okay, great. That's Ms. Takahashi sharing the screen for you.

[19:07] Thank you.

[19:23] And as I've showed, Ms. Takahashi will advance the slides

[19:25] for you if you'd. Like to introduce the item. Thank

[19:27] you. I mean, I might have to lean on Mr.

[19:32] Wu to take us through the slides. This is in

[19:37] response to. We report it back to council a couple

[19:40] of times on this. What staff have here. Is a

[19:46] couple of different options. Going over the original option and

[19:49] then also, like, a one way option, which council asked

[19:51] us to. Look at and some of the pros and

[19:53] cons of that. So maybe if we just go to

[19:56] the next slide and. I can see what I can

[20:00] do. While Stephen signing back on. Next slide, please. Can

[20:08] we move the slide, please?

[20:20] Hi, Mr. Moya. I just connected with Mr. Jet. He's

[20:22] going to pop over to. The park view. In about

[20:25] two minutes to deliver the brewer of the presentation and

[20:27] Ms. Takahashi will continue with the slides. Sure. And if

[20:31] we can just go to the next slide. I'll do

[20:33] my best. With it. Thank you, Mr. Moy. Thanks. Yeah.

[20:40] So this is, I think, just what I say is

[20:42] the direction from council. In March was to report back.

[20:46] On possible building setback requirements, one way traffic options, and

[20:50] the idea was to try to get some more pedestrian

[20:51] space. In there. Some wider sidewalks, next slide. This is

[20:57] definitely Steven's specialty. We did take a look at what

[21:04] existing guidelines exist. For sidewalks in these kinds of environments.

[21:10] So under the BCE act of transportation guide, which is

[21:13] quite new, it was released in the last few years.

[21:15] It provides a range for commercial sidewalks between 2.4 meters

[21:19] to 3 meters and that's for, like, a higher volume

[21:22] area where there's a lot of people. Walking, and it

[21:25] has a minimum width of 2.1 in a very constrained

[21:28] area for bi directional bike facilities three to 4 meters,

[21:32] down to 2.4. Similarly, We also wanted to make sure

[21:36] that we met minimum road design. Requirements which the Transportation

[21:42] association of Canada prescribes. Three to 3.5 meters. Lane of

[21:47] two. And in all of our options, where there's two

[21:50] way traffic, it's. A 3.25 and lane with a two

[21:53] meter parking lane. And then we also looked at urban

[21:56] forestry, which is important. It's an important goal of council

[21:59] and a big part of that is providing a reasonable

[22:02] treed boulevard. Reasonable width to allow healthy trees to grow.

[22:07] So we're looking at a two meter tree. Boulevard as

[22:10] ideal, a constraint limit of 1.6 and what we would

[22:13] have to do when we get to those narrower widths

[22:15] is we would put in underground soil cells. So basically.

[22:20] Chambers, I believe they're typically plastic, but chambers that can

[22:23] hold soil without having a lot of rock there. So

[22:26] you provide more growing medium for the trees. We'll go

[22:29] to the next slide. And I think that Stevens back

[22:32] on and running if you want to jump in. On

[22:35] the concepts. Thank you, Jeff. And I'm very sorry, Mary

[22:42] and council. For a computer. It's all good. So

[22:52] the original column concept follows a standard two way road

[22:58] with a 3.3 micromobility pathway and sidewalks that meet the

[23:02] minimum width of the DC transportation guide. While this option

[23:08] did support. While it does support micro mobility and maintains

[23:13] flexibility for traffic circulation, it lacks the optimal separation between

[23:17] users, and the sidewalk is at the bottom of the

[23:21] range at 2.4 meters. And this does become constrained at

[23:29] loading zones, as was noted by council as a previous

[23:32] meeting, street trees were designed to allow for the activation

[23:37] of one side of the street at 1.7. And provide

[23:40] a buffer. Between the pestrians and cyclists. 1.2 on the

[23:47] officer side. The width of the bus, the width of

[23:52] the buffer. Street trees do not meet the constrained limits.

[23:57] For landscaping and will reduce stability to achieve the overall

[24:00] portrait tenantee. So, as requested by council. We are revisited

[24:05] the office and we're looking at ways to increase our

[24:09] pedestrian facility as well as how to improve our land

[24:14] seeking horse tree target. So option

[24:24] one, to improve this pedestrian experience. That investigated incorporating on

[24:31] one way travel patterns the. Functionality of the one way

[24:35] will be discussed on the next slide. But from a

[24:38] design perspective, spring Street. Is classified as an emergency response

[24:43] brief. And as for the building code, this does require

[24:47] a minimum of 6 meters here. That needs to be

[24:52] maintained. So this provides a very small increase in the

[24:56] opportunity for Boulevard. By reducing the road width from 6.56

[25:02] liters. In this option, the microbility pathway was also reduced

[25:08] down to the minimum of 3.3 meters, which will promote

[25:13] slower speeds along this pathway but still maintain. The width

[25:19] that's required by the PCs. Ultimately, this additional width. Was

[25:28] incorporated into the landscaping strip to achieve the constrained tree

[25:32] limits as well as to increase the sidewalk with folks

[25:36] to the upper limit. The one way travel pattern creates

[25:41] additional separation between users, but the reduced roadwift will limit

[25:46] the future flexibility of the travel pattern. Temp, you

[25:55] reverted to a modern limit future. Staff

[26:04] evaluated the overall functionality and impacts of a one way

[26:08] road network. Consideration of. The first item was considering.

[26:19] Different circulation patterns, including westbound eastbound, as well as alternating

[26:24] travel between blocks. As noted that with each of the

[26:27] directions due to the limited road network. St John's is

[26:32] required to support the circulation, which will increase the number

[26:35] of tricks accessing. This major brief. In addition, with the

[26:41] limited distance between Spring street and St. John's, by focusing

[26:44] traffic towards specific intersections, the q length may exceed the

[26:49] available storage, creating additional congestion and delays. Along Spring street

[26:54] as an emergency corridor. The minimum width is 6 meters,

[26:57] as I've noted, which will create. Unusually wide roads, especially

[27:02] for one way travel. This will take special care traffic

[27:08] calming as well as enforcement to ensure the emergency brief

[27:12] is clear. Of elite parked cars and. Prevent. Illegal passing.

[27:22] The applicants have also provided feedback, raising concerns similar to

[27:26] staff, as well as pointing out. The overall liability for

[27:32] commercial units to be impacted, specifically the grocery store. Due

[27:38] to the limited opportunity. For. Cockpit and challenges with the

[27:44] access. So, going back to consideration for a

[27:54] twoway travel pattern, the second option balances the treat. Trees.

[28:02] To provide for the constrained limit as well as increases

[28:05] the sidewall slightly from the original concept. Up to 2.5

[28:10] liters. This additional space was obtained by maintaining the reduced

[28:17] micromobility. Staff recommend feel that this is. The most balanced

[28:25] approach as it does provide for. The land seeking targets,

[28:31] although be it at the constraint limit, it provides for

[28:34] the bi directional. Unintended sidewalk. It provides some flexibility to

[28:42] go from a one way or a two way. Travel

[28:44] pattern and. It also separates the micromobility users away from.

[28:51] The commercial and service vehicles. They'll be driving along Spring

[28:56] Street. In addition, stop feeling that there will be future

[29:01] opportunities to work with developers on a case by case

[29:04] basis to take into consideration. Opportunities with. Different landscaping or

[29:12] building designs to add additional space to. The sidewalk.

[29:24] The final option that would have considered. Requires an additional

[29:29] 0.8 meters width of statutory right away to be taken

[29:35] from to the developer that. Develops.

[29:46] Through the additional width, the cross section would be able

[29:49] to achieve the desired sidewalk. Width of 3 meters, as

[29:53] well as the necessary street trees zones to support the

[29:56] urban forestry goals. The increase. Will also have. Will have

[30:04] the impact. To the construction phasing. For instance, the alignment.

[30:13] The additional width requires. The alignment of the different facilities

[30:20] to be shifted on a temporary basis. Until full development

[30:25] of block is completed. Very difficult construction, pacing. It also

[30:33] creates impact on the development and design stages of the

[30:39] application. Which. In partner Westyloo. Go into more detail on

[30:45] the next slide. Thank you, Mr. Jed. All right, so,

[30:55] yeah, as noted earlier in this presentation, council also directed

[30:58] staff. At that time in March to investigate additional building

[31:02] setbacks on private property. So which additional building setbacks would

[31:07] be used to support additional sidewalk and or boulevard widths?

[31:11] So staff did engage the city's architecture consultant to provide

[31:15] some high level analysis and generally from a technical perspective

[31:19] and above ground setback would be feasible. However, Although technically

[31:24] possible, there are other factors that need to be taken

[31:26] into consideration. For example, There'd be impacts to already in

[31:30] stream applications that are currently sitting at third reading and

[31:34] in most cases, the setback would eat into the floor

[31:37] areas for employment space, which is also not desirable. So

[31:41] staff also heard from applicants that had some concerns on

[31:45] increased setbacks where it would impact several areas, including tree

[31:49] canopy coverage and meeting those targets as set out in

[31:51] their urban forestry management strategy. Existing building designs and parking

[31:58] and loading as well. So overall. Stuff. We do believe

[32:02] that, if feasible, additional building setbacks should be considered to

[32:06] achieve the maximum desirable sidewalk width. However, this requirements would

[32:10] occur on a case by case basis and to ensure

[32:13] that other objectives of the Moody Center 2D are being

[32:16] met, such as adequate tree canopy coverage and employment space.

[32:21] So should the recommended option be selected by council? Additional

[32:24] setbacks would not be part of the minimum cross section,

[32:28] but where feasible, staff would work. With the applicants to

[32:30] incorporate additional pedestrian width into the proposed developments to deliver

[32:35] an unimpeded and comfortable pedestrian experience. I think that's what

[32:39] our goal is here. And through those negotiations, when applicants

[32:45] come in, we would try to negotiate those items. So

[32:50] that's the portion on additional setbacks and where we're at

[32:53] with that. And next slide, we'll just. Have the recommended

[32:57] resolution for council to consider, and Mr. Judd and I

[32:59] are also available for any questions from council are there

[33:03] any members of council that have questions or comments on

[33:06] the presentation and or the recommendation, councilor Knowles? Thank you.

[33:12] Chair. Yeah. I just wanted to say thank you to

[33:14] staff. This has gone back and. Forth between staff and

[33:17] council, and for some time now. And shout out to

[33:21] Councilor Morrison, who can't be here tonight. He rightfully brought

[33:25] this up some weeks ago, maybe even months now. As

[33:31] we would have liked to really kind of activate the

[33:33] pedestrian experience. And we're looking for more of a gas

[33:37] town vibe, but everything that I've seen the staff has

[33:40] provided and the feedback that we've gotten from applicants. Has

[33:45] satisfied me that. Staff recommendation is the correct one, it

[33:50] is the safest one, and it is the best for

[33:52] this area. So I just wanted to thank. Staff and

[33:56] all the applicants for writing. And providing their feedback because

[34:01] it was very important in coming to this decision tonight,

[34:03] which I'm. Prepared to support, so I will move the

[34:06] recommendation. Thank you. Thank you. Is there a second? I

[34:10] will second at them. We have Councilor Lebecki, followed by

[34:13] councilor Lubeck. Thank you. I appreciate the work of staff

[34:19] on this because you've gone off and done what was

[34:21] asked and then come back. I'm just going to repeat

[34:23] the overall sentiments that I said before is I hear

[34:26] things like, council would have liked to see this or

[34:28] that. Well. Guess what we could have. We passed a

[34:32] framework. We didn't do any public engagement then. We passed

[34:35] it and it laid this plan out, and now here

[34:37] we are. Sitting here discussing design guidelines of feeling disappointed

[34:40] with them after we've already proved what is it. Two

[34:43] going on three developments and five towers not getting what

[34:47] we wanted, which is supposed to be a transit oriented,

[34:49] walkable neighborhood, and here we are discussing that it isn't

[34:52] even going to meet the basic guidelines for that. So

[34:56] I think that this is really confusing and not very

[35:00] acceptable or good news for our community. And I'm disappointed

[35:03] with how this process has unfolded, and I think many

[35:06] residents are, too. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Lubic. I

[35:12] really appreciate all the work that staff has done on

[35:14] this, and I know from my own point of view

[35:17] I would have liked to see. The one way, but

[35:21] I think staff have provided a very good overview of

[35:24] why that's not possible right now. I did want to

[35:29] say how much I appreciate that. We're looking at making

[35:32] sure that there are enough street trees and making sure

[35:35] that they're healthy. In those soil cells. I think that's

[35:38] really important. And I also wanted to, I guess, just

[35:43] say that. This doesn't impede. Us. This really becoming one

[35:51] way in the future. We've seen that happen with Thunderbrook

[35:55] before. And I think there will be opportunities as that

[36:00] goes on. And I do think that it will be

[36:03] as the way it is set up will help it.

[36:06] Be a more walkable. Community. And add the experience of

[36:11] multimodal. Travelers. So I just wanted to say I appreciate

[36:15] staff's work. I think. It's. We have now, and I'm

[36:21] hoping that it will be a right away. One way

[36:24] eventually. Thank you. Thank you, councilor. I don't see any

[36:28] other hands up. At this time. So I am going

[36:30] to call the question. All in favor of the recommendation?

[36:34] Against. I'm seeing councilor Lebecki oppose. That does pass. Thank

[36:42] you. We are going. To move into. Sorry, Ms. Lamb.

[36:47] I saw your hand go up briefly. Are we all

[36:51] good? We are. Thank you. Great. Thank you. We're going

[36:53] to move item. 4.2 this is exciting. This is the

[36:57] draft official community plan. I believe Mr. Paulie is going

[37:01] to be leading the presentation, supported by Ms. Smith. And

[37:06] for those that might be watching, I just want to

[37:09] let everyone know that this is the very first time

[37:12] that council has seen this draft OCP. We are seeing

[37:17] it at the exact same time as our community is

[37:20] seeing it, and I'm really looking forward to the presentation.

[37:23] From staff and the further engagement. Opportunities we're going to

[37:26] see roll out over the next five months before we

[37:30] adopt the OCP. So over to you, Ms. DePaul, Ms.

[37:33] Smith, thank you to share my screen.

[37:53] Hopefully you can all see that. We can see the

[37:55] presentations. There we go. You had the author notes on

[38:00] the side, but you're now full screen and good to

[38:02] go. Excellent. Thank you. So. Good evening, your worship and

[38:05] members of council. I'm very pleased. To be here with

[38:08] other members of the policy planning team to present an

[38:11] overview of the 2025 draft official community plan. Today's presentation

[38:17] includes background on the OCP update process that started in

[38:20] 2020. An overview of recent provincial housing legislation and its

[38:25] impacts on Port Moody 2050. A summary of community engagement

[38:30] process to date, followed by an outline of some of

[38:33] the key changes in this draft. OCP and lastly, an

[38:36] overview of anticipated next steps in the update process as

[38:40] we look towards future adoption of the plan. As you

[38:44] know, the last comprehensive review of Port Modi's OCP was

[38:47] in 2014. Public engagement on this OCP update process started

[38:55] in late 20 and continued through 2023. This included a

[38:59] variety of opportunities to learn and provide feedback, including community

[39:04] surveys, multiple community dialogue sessions, and a neighborhood workshop for

[39:08] the CVU neighborhood, and all this input helped shape the

[39:11] draft plan that was presented. In December 2023. Following the

[39:15] introduction of new provincial housing legislation in late 2023, the

[39:20] difficult decision was made to pause further public engagement on

[39:23] the draft OCP in order to better understand. And address

[39:27] potential impacts. In November 2023, these three bills related to

[39:33] Housing Statutes Amendment Act 2023 were introduced, including bill 44,

[39:39] residential development. And in response to this bill, Port Luthie

[39:43] updated its zoning bylaw to integrate small scale, multinated housing.

[39:50] In June of last year and in November of last

[39:51] year. An interim housing lease report was also completed within

[39:55] the prescribed timeline. The next bill, Bill 46. Financing introduced

[40:01] a new tool called Amenity cost charge that allows local

[40:05] governments to collect funds from new development to pay for

[40:09] amenities like community centers, recreation facilities, daycares and libraries. And

[40:13] these charges are intended to ensure that new development contributes

[40:16] to the cost of infrastructure needed to support a growing

[40:18] population, so. This work is currently underway, this completion in

[40:22] spring 2026. An existing development cost charges that we have

[40:27] now are also being updated in accordance with provincial guidelines.

[40:31] To be completed in fall of next year. Bill 47.

[40:37] Is the transit oriented areas statute. Which required vis to

[40:43] pass a bylaw establishing transit oriented areas as prescribed by

[40:46] the province and Fort looty passes bylaw in June of

[40:50] last year establishing transit oriented areas or toas around the

[40:54] Moody center and inlet center Skytrain stations, and then as

[40:58] the kind of density envisioned. Within the Toas was not

[41:02] contemplated in some parts of Moody center. Particular attention was

[41:06] focused on the area south of St. John's in a

[41:08] separate neighborhood planning process, which is estimated for completion in

[41:12] spring of next year. In terms of the impact and

[41:17] integration of provincial housing legislation into Port Moody 2050. Build

[41:22] 44 residential development required updates to ocps to include statements

[41:27] of need for each of the designated seven classes of

[41:31] housing need, as outlined in Port Ludy's 2021 housing needs

[41:34] report and the 2024 interim housing needs report. And an

[41:39] outline of OCP policy set support the seven classes of

[41:43] housing needs. Will form a new appendix in the OCP

[41:47] as required by legislation. And. Confirmation is required that the

[41:55] OCP designates enough land to meet the anticipated 20 year

[41:59] housing. Needs included in the 2024 interim housing needs report.

[42:06] While projections are still being refined at this time. Preliminary

[42:10] results indicate that this OCP will meet the 20 year

[42:12] housing need. Of just under 9800 housing units. In relation

[42:18] to Bill 47 transit oriented areas. The draft OCP includes

[42:23] a number of references to the Toa legislation. Where this

[42:27] legislation applies and the associated minimum density framework and a

[42:32] new south of St. John street special study area and

[42:35] related policy framework has been created to guide future, more

[42:39] detailed neighborhood planning for this area to understand and plan

[42:42] for the impacts of the Toa legislation. Those areas most

[42:46] significantly impacted by provincial housing legislation in the OCP include

[42:52] chapter 14, which is our overall land use strategy. That

[42:58] strategy now includes a new low density residential land use

[43:02] to incorporate small scale multi unit housing chapter seven, the

[43:05] built environment includes requirements, as I mentioned earlier, related to

[43:10] statements of housing needs and integrates the Toa minimum density

[43:13] framework. Chapter 14, which is neighborhood plan areas, has been

[43:18] updated to reflect new terminology in relation to transit. Oriented

[43:21] areas and contextual information related to small scale, multinated housing

[43:26] and transit oriented areas within the relevant affected neighborhood areas.

[43:33] Map one again. Shows is effective in terms of it

[43:36] now shows the Toa circles around. Two stations and how

[43:42] that impacts port Moody. And we. Have a new map

[43:46] 15 which shows a new development permit area for small

[43:50] scale multi unit housing. To meet the provincial requirements. This

[43:56] additional appendix, as mentioned earlier, will be created to list

[43:58] all the policies that address. Each class of housing needs.

[44:03] And we've included related changes to the public hearing process.

[44:07] As a result of legislation incorporated that into the OCP.

[44:12] This is a map showing all the lots in Port

[44:14] Moody affected by the small scale multination. Housing legislation. The

[44:17] green sheeted area as well up to four units in

[44:20] the purple sheeted areas up to six units. So these

[44:23] areas are now covered by this new low density. Residential

[44:29] land use designation. And are part of the development permanent

[44:34] area six, for which we have form and character guidelines

[44:38] to go along with this form of housing. This map

[44:42] includes areas affected by the transit oriented area legislation, as

[44:46] shown here in concedric circles around the two sky train

[44:48] stations. This map also shows the location of the Moody

[44:52] center station. Toa core, which is the rectangle outlined in

[44:58] black. Closest to the Luji center station. This area was

[45:05] formally referred to as the Moody center station. Tod area.

[45:09] So slight change in terminologies is so we can be

[45:12] less confusing and more in line with the provincial legislation.

[45:17] The circles that are furthest to the right show the

[45:19] inlet center toa core outlined in dark blue at the

[45:24] center of the inlet. Center to eight. And chapter 14

[45:28] outlines Landy's policies for these core areas as well as

[45:32] the wider Moody center and inlet center neighborhoods. This is

[45:37] an illustration of the Toa. Density framework. Which creates a

[45:46] land use system based on the distance from the transit

[45:50] center that defines standards such as minimum allowable density and

[45:54] heights. So height and density based on these 200, 408

[45:58] hundred meter concentric intervals from. The station. Centers with 20

[46:06] stories closest to the stations, decreasing to twelve stories and

[46:10] eight stories as you move. Further out and this graphic

[46:13] is incorporated into the official community plan for reference. Over

[46:19] the five year period from 2020 to 2025, the city

[46:23] has engaged Portley community. And on the evolving update of

[46:32] the OCP. This has included 17 engagement opportunities. Including multiple

[46:38] surveys, community dialogues, information sessions, open houses, including the most

[46:43] recent engagement effort in 2025 so in total, just over

[46:48] 4300 participants were involved in the OCP update process. And

[46:53] during this period, the input received engagement process has been

[46:57] incorporated into both a 2023 draft version of the OCP

[47:02] as well as this latest version. There's a summary for

[47:06] those who are watching of the engagement activities related to

[47:09] the OCP and the 2023 draft OCP as well as

[47:12] the 2025 draft OCP on the engage port movie page.

[47:18] So, as proposed in the draft 2023 OCP, This is

[47:25] the community vision. It's the same community vision in 2025

[47:30] as in 2023. The vision sets a foundation for the

[47:36] official community plan. It's a clear, shared vision that defines

[47:39] and brings meaning to what's important for the future of

[47:42] port Moody and guides the goals, objectives and policies of

[47:45] the OCP to inform decision making. I'll just quickly go.

[47:48] Through it. So in. 2050. Portmouth is a carbon neutral,

[47:55] resilient, inclusive, safe and vibrant. Waterfront city of complete and

[47:59] connected neighborhoods. Port Rudy has unique and complete neighborhoods with

[48:03] diverse amenities within a ten minute walk connected by an

[48:06] active transportation network portal. Visa friendly, walkable, healthy and green.

[48:11] Community that values its natural environment, environmentally sensitive areas, heritage,

[48:16] character and assets, parks and recreation area. Areas and the

[48:19] city of the Arts port. Ludi's commitment to arts and

[48:22] culture brings residents together through social protectedness, mutual understanding, and

[48:27] placement. Deed. So, unlike previous ocps, Portland 2050 has a

[48:32] strong climate action focus, which is evident in each focus

[48:36] areas of the plan. This image shows how different components

[48:45] flow into the OCP and are in turned informed by

[48:49] it. So at the top are the provincial requirements. Which

[48:52] set the timing for this OCP update and future updates

[48:56] as well. As well as some of the content of

[48:59] the OCP, the regional growth strategy. Outlines. The role of

[49:06] local governments in achieving regional goals. And it's reflected in

[49:12] our regional context statement how our OCP aligns with those

[49:15] regional goals council strategic plan. Informs Portman 2050 as well.

[49:23] And the overarching. Plan. That is incorporated throughout forming 2050

[49:30] is a climate action plan and you'll see following climate

[49:33] action plan. Are a number of other sector specific plans

[49:36] and strategies. And then at the bottom are examples of

[49:40] bylaws and policies. So all of these sector specific plans,

[49:44] strategies. And bylaws really implement the direction that's set in

[49:49] the official community plan. Map one shown here is the

[49:54] overall land use plan. It encompasses all properties in Fort

[49:57] Moody and Zassein's heat at land use designation. The. ToA

[50:06] circles are superimposed on this map for reference. Clearly show

[50:10] the areas that are impacted. Pardon me. And this is

[50:16] a close up of map one for the Moody center

[50:19] and Inlet center neighborhoods. It shows the provincial transit oriented

[50:23] tiers around each Skytrain station as an overlay, and then

[50:26] underneath that. Our port Moody's proposed land use designations. So

[50:33] while the majority of the land use designations remain unchanged

[50:36] from the 2023 draft to OCP, there are a few

[50:39] 2025 changes worth noting, which will be discussed in the

[50:42] upcoming slides. So these include two new special study areas

[50:47] that are outlined in black here. They might be a

[50:49] little bit hard to see. There's one. On Murray street

[50:54] here. Near kind of the middle of the graphic and

[50:57] then also this larger south of St. John Street. Black

[51:01] outlined area towards the bottom of the screen. As well

[51:06] as. The new low density residential land use that's shown

[51:11] here in yellow. Not just on the screen, but throughout

[51:15] the wider port booty, which now applies to single, detached

[51:20] duplex and small scale motions. Housing types. So the updated

[51:24] draft OCP document as a whole includes revisions to each

[51:27] chapter to reflect the range of port Modi studies, strategies,

[51:31] and plans that have been completed since the last OCP

[51:34] update comprehensive update in 2014. Port Moody 2050 also integrates.

[51:44] Current senior. Government legislation and regulation as well as best

[51:49] practices in relevant fields. Where that's applicable and the resulting

[51:54] plan. Is presented in this new refreshed format which really

[51:58] enhances readability and accessibility. And expresses Portmandi's identity throughout. Some

[52:06] new terminology was introduced as part of the provincial housing

[52:09] legislation, and to prevent confusion, the existing transit oriented development

[52:13] areas in the city's OCP have been renamed. As I

[52:16] mentioned earlier, the policy direction for each area remains the

[52:19] same. However. So the Moody center station Tod area is

[52:28] now the Ludic center transit oriented area core, indicating it's

[52:33] at the center of the larger transit oriented area. The

[52:38] boundaries as we'll get into have adjusted slightly as part

[52:41] of this OCB update. But remain substantially the same. And

[52:45] the inlet center? Station Tresoris development or TOD areas now

[52:50] the inlet center station transit Oregon area core. Just to

[52:56] note, as moody, center. Is particularly large and diverse part

[53:01] of the city. This section of chapter 14 in the

[53:04] draft OCP has been organized. From more general neighborhood level

[53:10] policies to more specific. Toa core policies. To really assist

[53:15] in understanding the relationship between these components. And make that

[53:20] more evident. In the document. The Moody center station, Toa

[53:27] Core area, again formerly known as the Tod area, is

[53:30] proposed to be extended slightly eastward to Buller street, all

[53:35] within 400 meters of the Moody center sky train. Station.

[53:44] So I'll just circle it here. It's in the addition

[53:46] of the area here. That. I'm just motioning with my

[53:50] cursor. The Moody Center

[53:59] Station Transit oriented development guidance framework for OCP and rezoning

[54:05] amendment applications was endorsed by council in 2023. As a

[54:10] framework to guide the review of applications in the TLD

[54:14] area in advance of OCP updates. So with this OCP

[54:17] update, key planning principles and land use policies in that

[54:21] framework have been incorporated. To align with it, and these

[54:27] include. New policies that. Within the core area. It's expected

[54:36] that there will be contributions to the city's minimum target

[54:40] of 2800. Jobs and full buildout within this area. That

[54:44] it will also include interconnected network of parks, open space,

[54:48] a daylight creek, pedestrian roots linking shoreline park to the

[54:52] chinese potential for building heights up to 39 stories on

[54:56] some parcels north of Spring street and up to 31

[54:59] stories on some parcels fronting St. John Street. A recommended

[55:05] tower separation of just over 30 meters. But also noting

[55:09] that. Some flexibility to go to a minimum of 28

[55:14] meters in some circumstances and really looking to achieve a

[55:18] varied. Very distinct, understandable skyline for the core area next

[55:24] to the station. The OCP land use designation for Murray

[55:29] street for the south side of Murray street has been

[55:31] updated to reflect a focus on urban industrial uses for

[55:35] this area. So just to know this would not include

[55:38] residential components. Three properties are also included in a new

[55:45] special study area that's outlined here in black. On Murray

[55:49] street. This is indicating that further study is needed to

[55:53] understand how these properties can redevelop to support a number

[55:56] of desired amenities that are listed in the OCP, including

[56:00] an overpass from the Moody center sky train station to

[56:05] Murray street and the daylighting of Dallas slaughterhous. Slaughterhouse Creek.

[56:11] As noted earlier, a new south of St. John street

[56:14] study area has been created to encompass an area. Significantly

[56:21] impact from the Toa minimum density framework. This ocp includes

[56:26] high level. Policy objectives for this area. To provide guidance

[56:30] for a more detailed. Future neighborhood plan for this area.

[56:35] And we expect that an OCP amendment to incorporate the

[56:38] south of St. John Street Neighborhood plan will happen in

[56:41] spring 2026. A cultural node has been identified, which includes

[56:47] city owned lands at Kyle Park, Kyle Center, Pomo. Arts

[56:51] and clean street, including the Queen Street Plaza and adjacent

[56:56] areas. And so the addition of a cultural node aligns

[56:59] with the city's commitments to arts, culture and herit. Heritage

[57:04] and will enhance the vibrancy of this neighborhood. It also

[57:07] intends to facilitate linkages between the north and south sides

[57:11] of St. John's. Street in this area between Kyle center

[57:14] and the wider heritage commercial district. So elements that are

[57:18] anticipated. For inclusion in the cultural node, including public art,

[57:22] flexible performance spaces, sibit and gathering spaces unique landscaping and

[57:27] street furniture elements, which. Really? Set this area as distinct

[57:33] from other surrounding areas as well as commercial and residential

[57:36] components. To support the vibrancy of this area. We engaged

[57:42] as part of this OCP process, specifically with the CVU

[57:45] neighborhood in 2023. And in response, the draft LCP includes

[57:53] a number of proposed land use changes for the eight

[57:57] areas outlined in the map on the slide, and these

[58:02] are really intended to increase the diversity of housing options

[58:05] beyond single family to both three story and six story

[58:09] residential forums and. The policies that relate to these specific

[58:14] areas outlined on the screen. Include detailed guidance on expectations

[58:19] for redevelopments. So some examples are. That are desires for

[58:24] parks and open space in these areas, transportation improvements, diversity

[58:29] of housing as well. And lastly, the draft OCP includes

[58:34] updates to the development Permia area guidelines for environmentally sensitive

[58:38] areas. These are very limited. Intended to provide clarity. Online

[58:48] applications are exempt. From the guidelines and also includes updated

[58:54] references to best practices in senior government legislation and regulation.

[59:00] And the guidelines have been reorganized for clarity and readability.

[59:06] And then to assist with the implementation of small scale,

[59:09] multi unit housing zoning changes. There's a new development permit.

[59:14] Area development Permanent Area six with forming character guidelines for

[59:17] Shmou. Development, and these align with the upcoming. Guide to

[59:23] Fosco Monte housing. Okay, so in terms of next steps

[59:30] in this process, In order to meet the December 31,

[59:37] 2025 legislative deadline, the following next steps have been identified

[59:42] so over July and August. The intention is to finalize

[59:46] the OCP document in bylaw. And engage with Metro Vancouver

[59:50] for preliminary review of the city's regional context. Statement. In

[59:55] September. This would include presentation to the city's land use

[1:00:01] committee and presentation of the draft OCP bylaw for consideration

[1:00:05] of two readings and referral to external agencies. And then,

[1:00:10] following a 30 day review period, a public hearing would

[1:00:13] be held, ideally in October, allowing for the regional contact

[1:00:18] statement to be referred to Metro Vancouver for acceptance in

[1:00:21] time for consideration by the metro board in November. And

[1:00:25] finally, consideration of the OCP. Adoption in early December to

[1:00:31] meet the legislative deadline. And that concludes my presentation. Thank

[1:00:37] you. Thank you. Mr. Polly, I want to say thank

[1:00:41] you to yourself and Liam and Isabelle as authors. Of

[1:00:45] the staff report. I found the staff report to be

[1:00:47] quite exceptional when it very specifically looked at the 2023

[1:00:52] draft OCP and what has been changed. And I think

[1:00:56] that. Delay. Well, unfortunate. It gave us additional time to

[1:01:04] actually improve. And I'll make those comments later. At this

[1:01:08] point, I'd like to open the discussion up to my

[1:01:11] colleagues. For questions, comments. Amendments. The floor is yours, committee

[1:01:18] members. I have. Councilor Lebecki, you have the floor. Thank

[1:01:24] you. I have no problem starting. Us off. So I

[1:01:31] just want to. Say? I significantly appreciate the work of

[1:01:35] staff on this and how much work it is and

[1:01:38] what's. Been done so far, and the quality of the

[1:01:40] work is exemplary, is important for the public. To realize.

[1:01:46] That the vision depicted here. Ultimately reflect. The level of

[1:01:51] density. And the vision of this council, though if there

[1:01:56] was a different counsel with a different vision around development.

[1:01:58] This job coming from staff would look completely different. And

[1:02:02] that's a fact. The problem with this OCP, as I

[1:02:05] see it in a nutshell, is an OCP. Is intended

[1:02:08] to reflect a community decision, not a council. In order

[1:02:13] for that to happen, a council needs to not only

[1:02:14] agree to listen to residents, but to take concrete action

[1:02:17] on what it hears. And what council has heard over

[1:02:21] and over and over again. The resident support me. Do

[1:02:24] not want to see overdevelopment. Instead, they want to see.

[1:02:27] Moderate growth and the no wall of powers they were

[1:02:30] promised. Get this OCP, if implemented, will result in extreme

[1:02:34] levels of growth. Walls of towers. And such a dramatic

[1:02:38] change to our beloved city. With such immense impacts, it's

[1:02:42] honestly hard to. Comprehend or communicate it when just reading

[1:02:46] from the flat pieces of paper it's written on. Many

[1:02:50] of the reasons people live here now and the reasons

[1:02:52] people move here will no longer exist. As we know

[1:02:55] them. Because port Moody, as we know today. Will continue

[1:02:59] to disappear in front of our eyes. But is this

[1:03:02] for some sort of greater good? Is there some new

[1:03:05] urban utopia waiting for us? At the end of this.

[1:03:08] If that was the case, maybe we could collectively agree

[1:03:11] it was just. All worth it. But our residents. If

[1:03:15] we follow the development plans proposed as of today and

[1:03:18] end in this document. Would lose their home as they

[1:03:21] know it. So we can fill the public skyline with

[1:03:24] dozens of luxury condo towers very few can afford that

[1:03:28] are unneeded, all the while seeing affordability. And livability for

[1:03:31] most people in our city continue to wor. Worsen. The

[1:03:35] approach that led us here today to this OCP. That

[1:03:39] holds that feature comes after council. Use public resources. At

[1:03:44] a council meeting, we invited a selected pundit to try

[1:03:47] and discredit the most successful public OCP surveys in our

[1:03:51] city's history. Surveys that directly counter much of what we

[1:03:55] see in this OCP. And this OCP comes after council

[1:03:58] has changed how we engage and how we engagement has

[1:04:02] been done in ocps. For decades. We will be having

[1:04:05] a fourth conversation. On that topic of engagement tonight, after

[1:04:09] delay in mixed messages to our community and on top

[1:04:13] of all this. We are currently considering expediting approval of

[1:04:16] the OCP by combining first and second reading without any

[1:04:20] planned public engagement on the actual OCP document. OCP's previous

[1:04:25] has line by line review. Reviews in council committee for

[1:04:29] hours. Council sat there to ensure they got it right.

[1:04:33] And I want to know when this is happening with

[1:04:34] this OCP. I do not believe that's intention for tonight,

[1:04:39] because it's part of a huge agenda. The doctor is

[1:04:42] not 100% complete. It's mid July when we know the

[1:04:45] public is occupied with summer, and I want to probably

[1:04:48] hear from the public on this full oCP. Document. There

[1:04:53] is a disconnect between the expectations of our community and

[1:04:58] how this council is governing. We work for our residents,

[1:05:02] the people who elected us and even those who didn't.

[1:05:06] And to suggest to the public. We hear you, but

[1:05:09] we disagree, so we are not going to change. Course.

[1:05:13] Is really not the best approach to take with the

[1:05:15] people who put us at this table. What is needed

[1:05:18] is total transformation and how council approaches its relationship with

[1:05:22] the public so that the public knows the voice matters

[1:05:25] not in theory or to check a box, but because

[1:05:28] their voices will directly inform the future of the community.

[1:05:31] They love making sure the voices of people matter. That

[1:05:36] is why. I'm here and what I'm representing tonight, that

[1:05:39] is what I have been here. Representing every night. And

[1:05:42] that is what I will continue to fight for. This

[1:05:45] OCP needs significant review and changes that reflect the feedback

[1:05:49] we've heard from the community. I do not support the

[1:05:52] next steps outlined. Right now towards its approval, because I

[1:05:57] don't believe it's going to be allowing us to hear

[1:06:00] from the community as we need to. Thank you. Timing

[1:06:06] on that, Councilor Rebecca. I have councilor Noldas up next.

[1:06:11] Thank you, Councilor Joelworth. So first I want to do

[1:06:14] the same. I want to thank staff for their continued

[1:06:16] work on this excellent 186 page document. Despite all the

[1:06:21] setbacks and obstacles thrown our way by the province in

[1:06:23] the last two years. I know it hasn't been. Easy.

[1:06:26] It's been a slog. It's been a lot of back

[1:06:28] and forth. With a lot of different pieces. That had

[1:06:31] to come together, so I just wanted to recognize that

[1:06:34] effort. What we have seen in front of us. Really?

[1:06:41] Is a culmination of all that work, so it looks

[1:06:43] great. I appreciate staff mentioning just how many public engagement

[1:06:47] opportunities have been provided over the years to get us

[1:06:50] to today. And in general, I think this draft accurately

[1:06:54] captures priorities and vision, not just of this council, but

[1:06:57] of this community at large and the residents I've spoken

[1:07:00] to about it. Even though we've only received this about

[1:07:02] four days ago. They're really enthusiastic about activating port Modi's

[1:07:07] potential as a vibrant dynamic. Place to live with opportunities

[1:07:11] and amenities. And being able to access arts and culture

[1:07:16] and transit, it's all really coming together, so. I'm really

[1:07:20] pleased in particular. I'm glad we're going to maintain Murray

[1:07:26] street as industrial, given that we're. Doing our part to

[1:07:29] add housing adjacent to our sky trains, not just as

[1:07:33] mandated by the official government, but. As appropriate, I think.

[1:07:39] Both for matters of traffic, climate change and best practices.

[1:07:44] I wanted to address a comment I just heard now,

[1:07:47] and I've heard a couple of times at this table.

[1:07:49] To be clear, council works all year round because we

[1:07:52] have a lot of work to do. There is a

[1:07:56] lot of projects we have on the go, a lot

[1:07:57] of large projects, and tonight's agenda is just a small

[1:08:00] example of that. So to suggest that we shouldn't. Be

[1:08:03] working on large projects. Or proceeding with projects because it's

[1:08:07] summer or because it's winter. Makes no sense. And I

[1:08:12] absolutely reject that. I reject that idea. We need to

[1:08:15] keep going. We need to do the job that we've

[1:08:17] been elected to do, and I'm very proud of us.

[1:08:20] That word's doing it. I don't know about other jobs,

[1:08:23] but in every job I've ever had and I've been

[1:08:25] working since I was 16. I've worked during the summer,

[1:08:27] and I worked in December and I work in July.

[1:08:30] So that's not going to change. And I thank staff

[1:08:34] for everybody gets some vacation time. Off, and I know

[1:08:37] staff is probably going to take some time off the

[1:08:39] summer, and I hope they enjoy that time, but the

[1:08:41] work must continue. I do have a few concerns related

[1:08:45] to how the OCT refers to specific land parcels, and

[1:08:49] I hope we hear directly from residents affected by this

[1:08:52] language now that we've got a draft. In front of

[1:08:55] us. I know we've seen at least two letters already.

[1:08:57] Which is why it's really important for everyone to read

[1:09:00] and understand the document while OCPs can be changed and

[1:09:03] amend. Amended and are considered living documents. I think it's

[1:09:06] best if we can make everyone as happy as possible

[1:09:09] for final version is approved. So one of the concerns.

[1:09:14] Was related to the treatment of the south side of

[1:09:16] duty trunk as being different from the north. Side. I

[1:09:20] know staff just received that email, so I just want

[1:09:23] to make sure that's on. Their radar. I'm sure it

[1:09:24] is. I look forward into digging into that with staff

[1:09:27] before. Going forward because I know that those residents are

[1:09:30] concerned. The second set of concerns relates to language. Used

[1:09:34] in the section referencing the ocean print property. And from

[1:09:38] my first read, I agree with much of it. I

[1:09:41] know we're all anxious to work with that landowner to

[1:09:43] move that project forward and expand Rocky Point park at

[1:09:45] the same time, so I'm hoping we can chat later

[1:09:48] with staff about some of the issues brought up in

[1:09:50] that letter we only received this afternoon, so I think

[1:09:53] it makes sense to give staff a chance to review

[1:09:56] before we go through these issues one by. One. I

[1:09:59] think most of them are quite reasonable, but. There are

[1:10:02] a few matters that it brought up, particularly the ESA

[1:10:05] issue again, and I had a quick question. What is

[1:10:09] floodplain zoning? Is that something that you can help me

[1:10:12] with, Mr. Polly. Here it is, staff. Thank you. Through

[1:10:18] the chair. We're in the midst of a coastal flood

[1:10:22] strategy currently. Which. We expect. To develop a number of

[1:10:30] recommendations so some of those could relate to a new

[1:10:34] flood construction level. And potential new setbacks, which would. Be

[1:10:42] enforced through the zoning bylaw. So that's just to give

[1:10:45] you some examples. Of potential changes to zoning as a

[1:10:49] result. Okay, so we'll flesh those out, hopefully in future

[1:10:53] iterations of this document. Just to make that clear. Because.

[1:10:57] Yeah, I didn't know what that was either. Okay, I

[1:10:59] know we've only got about 30 seconds left, so I'll

[1:11:02] leave my comments there for now. I look forward to

[1:11:04] a chance to. Get into this further with my colleagues

[1:11:08] and with the community. Really hope everyone provides us with

[1:11:10] their feedback. And this is just the beginning, and I'm

[1:11:15] excited for what's to come, so. Again, appreciate your work

[1:11:18] on this staff. And I'll leave it there. Thank you.

[1:11:22] Thank you. Councilor. Councilor. Egg Torah. And then. Thank you.

[1:11:31] Yeah. Again, I just want to extend appreciation to staff

[1:11:33] for all this work. I know it's. A lot of

[1:11:36] work to gather all the input, to do all the

[1:11:39] consultation, and to gather. All the information from the plans

[1:11:44] and strategies that we already have in existence and put

[1:11:47] in a comprehensive plan that's easy to read. And so

[1:11:51] I really appreciate that. I have a couple of questions.

[1:11:57] Specifically around the vision and goals. When was the visioning

[1:12:01] exercise undertaken? Mr. Polly. There was.

[1:12:12] A specific engagement on the vision and goals which took

[1:12:14] place. As part of. The 2020 to 2023 engagement phase

[1:12:21] of the OCP. And that resulted in the same vision

[1:12:26] that is carried forward in the 2025 draft. Okay, so.

[1:12:31] Then to clarify. The vision was written. Prior to the

[1:12:38] 2023 version that we saw and then put on hold.

[1:12:41] So this council has not given any specific direction on

[1:12:45] the vision and goals. That's correct. Okay, thank you. I

[1:12:51] just want to clarify that. I have a few other

[1:12:55] questions. In the housing section or the built environment section,

[1:13:00] there's a term, gentle density. And while I understand. What

[1:13:09] that is intended in there. For clarity, I feel like

[1:13:11] it might be useful to define and I was wondering

[1:13:14] if staff is considering adding a glossary. Ms. Dapoli through

[1:13:20] the chair to Councilor Eggtrap. At this time, we hadn't

[1:13:23] contemplated that, but it's certainly something we can consider if

[1:13:27] council wishes us to. Incorporate that we can also. Take

[1:13:33] as we have done in other places. Take certain terms.

[1:13:38] And include. Kind of pop out boxes throughout the document

[1:13:42] where we can provide that additional clarity on specific terms.

[1:13:47] As they're brought up in the document. I think that

[1:13:49] might. I'll leave it. To my colleagues to comment too,

[1:13:53] but I think that might be useful. For that one

[1:13:57] in particular. I think there's some other ones. Later on.

[1:14:03] It's on page 51.6, talking about shelters and housing for

[1:14:07] people at risk. It mentions homelessness prevention strategies and rapid

[1:14:12] rehousing programs. And I think that might be useful to

[1:14:17] sort of expand upon so that we can fully understand.

[1:14:20] What that might mean. Additionally, also on that page, it

[1:14:25] does. Say? The number of people experiencing homosexist in Port

[1:14:31] Moody has the potential to rise in the coming years.

[1:14:33] While shelter may not. Be needed. There is an opportunity

[1:14:37] to implement homeless strategies. Et cetera, et cetera. We've seen

[1:14:43] from. 2020 to 2023, there was an 86% increase in

[1:14:48] homelessness. So it's almost like it is rising. We don't

[1:14:53] have the 2025 numbers. Yet, but we should be getting

[1:14:55] that in the fall. So just maybe cleaning up that

[1:15:00] language, and I would suggest. Deleting. There's a sentence that

[1:15:04] says at this time, there's little evidence. To support. However,

[1:15:08] maybe we could just delete that and start. Delete that

[1:15:11] section and start with increasing. Affordability constraints, I think, is

[1:15:15] the rest of that sentence. Just to give the flexibility,

[1:15:19] and I think. To not sort of presuppose what the

[1:15:24] results of the. Homeless count might be. Another specific comment.

[1:15:33] On page 56. Objective to point to. It says encourage

[1:15:39] landlords to abide by the minimum standards of maintenance. And

[1:15:42] we now have a bylaw, so encourage seems. A little

[1:15:47] like, are we encouraging before enforcing or are we taking

[1:15:51] an educate then a force approach? Can you just provide

[1:15:56] some clarity on that point? To the chair.

[1:16:06] Can I respond? Okay, great. So the policy relates to

[1:16:10] encouraging compliance is sort of almost preemptively avoiding having to

[1:16:14] enforce the bylaw. And prevent unlivable tenant living conditions from

[1:16:19] happening or getting worse. So this would be done on

[1:16:22] a complaint basis. It wasn't meant to say we're. Not

[1:16:26] enforcing the bylaw, but it was really. Looking. To. Encourage.

[1:16:32] Compliance before taking any action, okay? Thanks for clarity buying

[1:16:37] that and then. I just have. One other point. Or

[1:16:43] two others. I guess we also say encourage provision of

[1:16:46] on page 67, encourage the provision of car share programs

[1:16:49] and a dedicated parking spot. I don't know if it's

[1:16:52] worthwhile to be have a little bit more stronger language.

[1:16:55] I think that's something that we're seeing in developments that

[1:16:58] are coming forward, that they are having that. I leave

[1:17:02] it up to the rest of council to sort of

[1:17:04] weigh in on this, do we? Want to have. I

[1:17:07] don't know if we want to go down the road

[1:17:09] of require. But I feel like car share programs and

[1:17:13] making sure that we have dedicated spaces for that is

[1:17:15] going to be really important, especially as we move away

[1:17:19] from. The parking regulations and parking minimums have changed. And

[1:17:26] then sort of the last point. Is on page 72.6.

[1:17:30] It. Says, as part of the city's effort to enhance

[1:17:35] the image of Moody center, no further service station commercial

[1:17:37] zones or automobile oriented commercial zones shall be permitted. Existing

[1:17:41] property zone for automobile oriented use shall be encouraged to

[1:17:44] be rezoned and redeveloped. Does this mean that eventually we'll

[1:17:48] have zero places for car repair and maintenance? Mr poly.

[1:17:56] Through the chair. No, it's not intended. It's more focusing

[1:18:04] on. I think some of those larger parcels. That are

[1:18:11] dedicated to car sales. Those needs in terms of service

[1:18:15] stations. Or automobile oriented service. Repair shops, they can

[1:18:25] continue under the existing zoning. And with the retention. Of

[1:18:31] industrial on the south side of Worry street. It may

[1:18:34] be that some of those areas may become available. In

[1:18:38] the long term for some of these uses as well.

[1:18:41] It's not meant to push them out, but really just

[1:18:44] to signal along St John's. Street. Some other uses might

[1:18:51] be preferred, and there may be other areas of the

[1:18:53] city where service. Uses like this could be a better

[1:18:59] fit. Okay, so as long as we're not, I. Don't

[1:19:02] want to have to drive to Maple Ridge or pit

[1:19:05] meadows to get my car. Serviced. I recognize that things

[1:19:08] are changing, but. If we're going to complete communities still

[1:19:14] need getting some of those services nearby. So that's it

[1:19:18] for me. And I'll just leave it there for comments

[1:19:22] for now. Thank you. Great. Thank you, councilor. Councilor lubic.

[1:19:28] I want to start by saying how much I appreciate

[1:19:30] all of that work on this. This is a mavic

[1:19:33] undertaking, and it was really great to take a look

[1:19:36] back through all of the engagement that you've done, and

[1:19:39] especially, like, looking at the community vision. I know that

[1:19:41] that was quite a long time ago. So I'd love

[1:19:46] to hear more once we get into the next topic.

[1:19:50] About community vision and goals and values now. But it

[1:19:55] was really great to look at those engagement sessions and

[1:19:58] see that, although we don't. All agree on what things

[1:20:02] will look like at the end. There are some cross

[1:20:06] cutting themes that are the values and goals that I

[1:20:11] think that we're all trying to achieve. And so I

[1:20:14] think staff have done a great job of outlining how

[1:20:16] we're going. To do that. Looking at how we heard

[1:20:19] that people wanted to take on traffic, which we've heard

[1:20:22] over and over again. Affordable housing, expanding parks, incorporating climate

[1:20:28] impacts, and expanding recreation services were some of the top

[1:20:32] themes that I saw. I will say that I really

[1:20:35] appreciate the work to maintain. As industrial. I think that

[1:20:41] that's a really important piece. I do have a number

[1:20:46] and I also love how staff laid out this report.

[1:20:48] I will say especially in the different changes that have

[1:20:50] been made. I do have. A number of. Comments and

[1:20:58] we'll see if they have to be motions. I hope

[1:21:02] that they don't. We'll see. So as far. Just. Some

[1:21:08] of the starting comments on page twelve. Climate change. We

[1:21:11] have a lot of great. Bullets on adaptation, but I

[1:21:16] know we've talked a lot about adaptation. Into social inbuilt

[1:21:19] infrastructure that projects for residents and ensures the longevity of

[1:21:24] civic assets and I don't see that reflected in those

[1:21:26] points. So I'd like to see that personally. In the

[1:21:31] built environment section on Bill 14. I think it's really

[1:21:35] important. That. Include preservation and renewal of rental stock. I

[1:21:42] know that. That's later on in the document. But sometimes

[1:21:45] people don't. Read. Any farther in the first open. As

[1:21:51] well. We do talk about. It appears that councilor Lubic

[1:21:56] has frozen. And to meet the needs of our residents

[1:22:05] throughout the document. Yeah. Councilor Lubit, you froze. There for

[1:22:09] about 30 seconds, so we might have missed some of

[1:22:11] what you were saying. And I am trying to go

[1:22:17] fast, though I don't go over time, but really just

[1:22:21] to say that I think that there are some things

[1:22:23] that need to be included around health and social infrastructure

[1:22:26] does not just daycare. On page 14. On page 20.

[1:22:34] I think it's important that. We clarify some of the

[1:22:37] wording because it does still say 26 stories. And I

[1:22:41] know we've talked about the Moody center framework, and I

[1:22:43] think, and why in some cases, it can go up

[1:22:47] to 39 stories if there are the right amenities and

[1:22:51] deport or preservations and things like that. Staff do a

[1:22:55] really good job of explaining that later on in the

[1:22:58] document. But again, I think it's important to do. It

[1:23:02] upfront if people stop reading. And I'm also curious. We

[1:23:07] do a lot of great work around biodiversity. And other

[1:23:12] cities have biodiversity targets. And what? There are some guidance

[1:23:18] around what that could look like in 2000 and 32,050.

[1:23:21] So I'd love to explore that. On page 31. I

[1:23:27] love this green and structure projects. And this was brought

[1:23:31] forward originally by our finance department, so there's a lot

[1:23:34] of cost. Savings and benefits to our infrastructure that actually

[1:23:38] isn't really talked about in that introduction. So. I'd like

[1:23:41] to see that personally. On page 49. We talk about

[1:23:45] complete communities, but we don't talk about urban highlands. Urban

[1:23:48] heat island mitigation, and I think that that's important as

[1:23:52] well. On page 55 on climate. Housing. We do talk

[1:24:00] about low energy. We don't talk about low energy cooling

[1:24:05] or heating, which is something that we've all been advocating

[1:24:08] for and trying to incorporate into new projects. And we

[1:24:12] also have things like lBO surfaces. And exterior shading and

[1:24:16] our sustainability checklist, but we don't really talk about. Thermal

[1:24:21] comfort inside buildings, which from the heat, we know is

[1:24:25] extremely important. So I think the impatible that would be

[1:24:29] important. And as well. In page. I think it's 57.

[1:24:37] We talk about? Visible. It talks about achieving non market

[1:24:44] housing, which is really important, but I think it's important

[1:24:47] to be explicit. That we are trying to, that we

[1:24:51] have an inclusionary zoning policy. And my time is up.

[1:24:55] Had more to say. But I'll leave it there. As

[1:25:00] someone else noted earlier in the meeting, this is the

[1:25:02] first conversation we all picked up our 370 page binders

[1:25:07] last week, and I know we've all gone through it,

[1:25:09] at least once, maybe twice, but are going to need

[1:25:12] to go through it a third or a fourth time.

[1:25:16] Marlotti, did you want to make any comments? Before you

[1:25:24] start, Marilotti. I see Mr. Polly has her hand up.

[1:25:29] Thank you. I just wanted to correct something. I misspoke.

[1:25:35] In the 2025 engagement survey that we had in the

[1:25:38] spring, we did have a question related to the community

[1:25:41] vision where. We showed the community vision from 2023, the

[1:25:46] one that we were still proposing for 2025. And we

[1:25:51] asked for comments in relation to is anything missing? Yes.

[1:25:56] Tell us what you'd like to see. So we did

[1:25:58] receive. Feedback as part of the more recent engagement on

[1:26:02] that proposed vision. All right. Thank you for that, Mr.

[1:26:05] Polly Marlotti. Thank you. Yeah, I think. What councilor? Xrap

[1:26:10] was getting at was. The fact that council has a

[1:26:15] provided direction or input on any of this. This is

[1:26:18] our first opportunity. To do that. I want to start

[1:26:24] off by. Actually thanking staff for the work that they

[1:26:28] put in. This is an incredible amount of work. And

[1:26:33] the document? Is really well put together. It is. Extremely.

[1:26:40] It flows nicely. The information. In there. The work that

[1:26:45] went into that is just amazing and. I can't thank

[1:26:48] staff enough. I know it was a lot of work,

[1:26:51] and I know that they have been working on this

[1:26:54] since 2020. Since I think towards the end of 2020

[1:26:57] and consistently. I know that in 2024, we took a

[1:27:03] pause. From public engagement. However, staff did not pause on

[1:27:07] the OCP work. They continued to work on this. And

[1:27:11] I will say that I agree with some of the

[1:27:15] comments made earlier. In fact, I appreciate the comments that

[1:27:18] councilor Lubic just brought up around some of the sort

[1:27:21] of minutiae and some of the detailed. Areas that she'd

[1:27:26] like to see, maybe strengthened a bit or perhaps. Having

[1:27:31] some additions in that, and I agree with the chair.

[1:27:33] We will have an opportunity to provide. That both tonight.

[1:27:38] And at future meetings. So I think it's important. That

[1:27:44] despite some of the previous comments that were made that

[1:27:47] people understand that this document has incorporated input from the

[1:27:51] community. Along with. The professional planners. And competent planners that

[1:27:59] we have. They have put together a document that I

[1:28:03] think we should be very proud of here tonight. I

[1:28:07] appreciate that. There were some comments made. Earlier about. The

[1:28:13] level of growth and the level of. Sort of the

[1:28:17] height of towers and things like this and walls of

[1:28:19] towers and. We need to understand that.

[1:28:32] The document that is guiding this, the guidance framework that

[1:28:35] we put together was put together for the purpose of

[1:28:37] making sure that we are not creating a wall of

[1:28:39] towers. That we are stepping buildings back that. We have

[1:28:45] proper separation between towers, that there is a variance in

[1:28:48] heights, and this is in an attempt to make sure

[1:28:51] that. We're not going down the road of some of

[1:28:54] our neighbors. And so I appreciate that there's a concern

[1:28:59] about that, I really do. But I believe that we

[1:29:01] have done what we needed to do in order to

[1:29:04] prevent that from happening. The fact that. This plan is

[1:29:11] now going to reflect some of the decisions that we've

[1:29:14] already made as a council. Is a good thing. And

[1:29:18] I agree with councilor Agtrap's comments around making sure that

[1:29:22] we are very explicit. Or was that councilor lubic? I'm

[1:29:24] not sure. Where we're talking about the heights of buildings.

[1:29:30] And that staff is explaining it later on in the

[1:29:31] document. But we do need to make sure that we

[1:29:33] are very clear at the upfront of the document as

[1:29:37] well. So in that section, I would suggest that we

[1:29:40] add that clarity. I think that this document actually reflects

[1:29:46] the community's vision and its goals around being a carbon

[1:29:50] neutral community. A unique community with connected neighborhoods, a friendly,

[1:29:55] walkable, healthy, green community. This isn't about the height of

[1:29:59] towers. This is about what is the future vision. What

[1:30:03] is the community vision? For what this community is going

[1:30:08] to look like 20 years from now, 30 years from

[1:30:10] now, and I think that this does a good job

[1:30:13] of putting into context. All of the things that are

[1:30:17] important to this community. Like. A commitment to the arts

[1:30:22] and culture and social connectedness. And a mutual understanding and

[1:30:27] place. Making goal. That we can then place that as

[1:30:32] parameters around the growth that we're going to take. That

[1:30:35] we're going to take on. We are taking on growth.

[1:30:38] There is no question about it. It's how we do

[1:30:40] it that matters. And this is going to lay out.

[1:30:44] The plan for. How we grow as a community. So

[1:30:48] I support this plan. With the exception of some little

[1:30:52] areas that I think we need to get more clarity

[1:30:55] on, I'd like to ask Ms. De Pali a question

[1:30:58] around that was raised by Councilor Knowles. Earlier around. The

[1:31:03] question around duty, trunk and why staff? Has. Treated one

[1:31:09] side of duty trunk different than the other. Mr. Polly.

[1:31:21] Unfortunately. I think there was a recognition also that a

[1:31:27] Toa framework. Applies. Almost equally to the north and south.

[1:31:35] And so the land use designations. That we developed in

[1:31:42] 2023 remained knowing. That in some cases, Applications could come

[1:31:50] forward for extra density. So the changes weren't made in

[1:31:56] that respect to align with that. It was in no

[1:32:01] way meant to treat them differently. Because of that recognition

[1:32:07] that there was the Toa overlay, that. Applied. I'll take

[1:32:13] a look at the exact letter that came forward to

[1:32:15] better understand, I think. Because I think there's some nuance

[1:32:19] in there that I'm missing, and so. I'd like to

[1:32:21] take some time. Yeah. And I think there may be

[1:32:23] an opportunity to. Alleviate some of the concerns that were

[1:32:26] raised. By the property owners on that side just to

[1:32:31] provide more clarity to them. But I appreciate that answer.

[1:32:36] I think notwithstanding the fact that we are going to

[1:32:38] have a conversation. I think it's the next item on

[1:32:41] this agenda, or. In this committee. About potentially having another

[1:32:49] opportunity. To invite the community in. For more input. Your

[1:32:57] time is out there. I'm just. Putting a bow on

[1:33:05] it. I think that we will have an opportunity. Later

[1:33:10] to have more conversation about this. So I appreciate that.

[1:33:13] Thank you. Chair. Thank you. I want to thank my

[1:33:15] colleagues for the breadth of commentary. I think everybody was

[1:33:19] looking at this through different lenses, and I really appreciate

[1:33:22] it. And I'm going to maybe look at this from

[1:33:25] different than some of my colleagues. First of all, This

[1:33:29] is a long term visioning document, what we approved today.

[1:33:34] Is going to be reviewed and looked at every five

[1:33:37] years, every seven years. Moving on to the rest of

[1:33:41] Port Moody's history. Some of us who've been sitting at

[1:33:44] this table and have seen a number of ocps recognize

[1:33:47] that they will change. As we go through, as different

[1:33:52] things in our society change, I want to say. I

[1:33:56] think staff did an exceptional job, and I want to

[1:33:59] invite people to go look at, engage. Port Moody. Literally

[1:34:04] thousands and thousands and thousands of pages of work has

[1:34:08] gone into this document. Well, the document itself is only

[1:34:12] about 200 pages, supported by another 200 pages of appendices

[1:34:17] reading through the binder. I've identified over two dozen reports

[1:34:23] and strategies that our community has been a part of.

[1:34:27] Staff have been listening to our residents. Council has been

[1:34:30] listening to those. And I look at climate action plan,

[1:34:34] urban forest, arts and culture master plan, climate ready homes

[1:34:38] and building plan. I'm not going to go through the

[1:34:40] list of two dozen, but this is an incredibly well

[1:34:43] informed document. And staff. Has been listening and hearing and

[1:34:49] regularly providing counsel back with what we heard reports and

[1:34:53] engaged port moody. Any resident can look at every single

[1:34:57] piece of paper, every report. Every engagement summary, announce the

[1:35:02] opportunity to look at every single piece of input that

[1:35:05] council is having. At this point. Over 4000 participants recognizing

[1:35:12] some of those might be duplicate, with some people repeatedly

[1:35:15] participating over 4000 pieces of input. The Lounst OCP had

[1:35:23] just over 1000. So I think there are more people

[1:35:27] that are interested. I love the fact that the delay

[1:35:31] that we've had between 2023 and 2025 has allowed staff

[1:35:35] to bring back. Things. That are really important. There's a

[1:35:41] much more stronger climate action focus than there was two

[1:35:43] years ago. We've introduced the new provincial legislation. We've given

[1:35:49] a strong port Moody identity. It's worth repeating. This is

[1:35:54] a community vision, not a council vision. This has been

[1:35:57] worked. On by two separate councils to get to this

[1:36:01] point. And I also want to see, I think it's

[1:36:06] really important what's new and different. And greater importance in

[1:36:11] this version is housing action, climate action, and action on

[1:36:16] truth and reconciliation, which I think is quite important. I

[1:36:21] like the changes to Murray Street. I'm so thrilled to

[1:36:27] be rolling out this cultural node later this evening. In

[1:36:32] another meeting that we're having. I think this council is

[1:36:35] making some bold decisions that we committed to. Two and

[1:36:39] a half years ago. I, from my count, see that

[1:36:43] there's four, potentially five more opportunities for the public to

[1:36:48] weigh in. We can all be reached at council at

[1:36:51] Portmoody, Ca. My understanding is the Port Moody engage page

[1:36:57] on the official community plan. Is going to be. I

[1:37:00] think it was last updated last week. It's going to

[1:37:02] be a living revolving opportunity. We have first and second

[1:37:06] readings. We have land use. We have a public hearing.

[1:37:11] And. We might have differing views. But we're all here.

[1:37:16] We all come to this table to do our very

[1:37:19] best in representing what we believe are the best interests

[1:37:22] of our residents and of our community, not just looking

[1:37:26] at five years ahead, but looking at ten, looking at

[1:37:29] 15, looking at 20, and I think this is an

[1:37:32] amazing first step, and I really want to hear from.

[1:37:35] Residents what they like or don't like about the official

[1:37:40] community plan, and I have to say it is such

[1:37:43] an exceptional document. And I really dug down in it,

[1:37:48] but I'm going to have to dig down again. And

[1:37:51] again. And I think all of us have that opportunity

[1:37:54] to bring back some of the things that we would

[1:37:56] like to see tweaked or made different, and whether that's

[1:37:59] by resolution or not? Certainly I heard some ideas from

[1:38:02] councilor lubic. I heard some ideas. From councilor Nols. So,

[1:38:06] again. It's now in council's hands. Staff have brought it

[1:38:15] this far, and it's a very exciting time for council

[1:38:18] in our community, and my time is up, so thank

[1:38:22] you. Now, where do we go from here? We have

[1:38:27] a staff recommendation if someone would entertain moving and seconding

[1:38:33] it. I see that moved and I see that seconded.

[1:38:40] Mayor Lottie, that was just to move and second it.

[1:38:42] Okay, thank you. Everybody's had a full five minutes to

[1:38:46] speak on this, so I'm going to call the question

[1:38:48] all in favor. Opposed. Councilor Lebecci is opposed. Now asking

[1:38:58] committee members and staff, is this where we want to

[1:39:02] take a dinner break prior to jumping into the next

[1:39:05] item. I think that's what it showed. On the. Let

[1:39:09] me see the meeting summary. Hang on here. Hang on.

[1:39:13] Everyone has so many screens open. Yes, we are scheduled

[1:39:18] for. A 30 minutes dinner break at this time. That

[1:39:25] is correct, Ms. Lamb. Yes, chairperson. Sorry, can I interrupt?

[1:39:31] Chair? Yes, counselor. Sorry, I thought that I saw that

[1:39:36] the dinner. Break was at 720. And it was based

[1:39:40] on. The conclusion of item 4.2 docp. Okay. Thank you.

[1:39:50] Okay, Ms. Lamb, can you confirm for us what would

[1:39:53] 30 minutes be? Thank you, chairperson. If council wishes to

[1:39:59] take their dinner break now, it is at the willow

[1:40:01] council. We could reconvene at 710. Lottie. I see your

[1:40:06] hand up again. Yeah. I think that perhaps, maybe the

[1:40:13] timing. Was a suggested time by staff, but it sounds

[1:40:19] like maybe at least one counselor has their dinner. Plan

[1:40:23] for 720 based on that timing and. If council wants

[1:40:28] continue on with 4.3. We have two more items left

[1:40:33] on the city initiatives and planning committee agenda. Thought stood.

[1:40:39] Do people want to continue on thumbs up or take

[1:40:41] a break? May I suggest that we do maybe one

[1:40:44] more item and then see where we are? Chair, madam?

[1:40:48] Chair. Councilor Lubik, you have your hand up. You just

[1:40:52] asked for a thumbs up. I'm happy to continue for

[1:40:55] a bit. Okay, we're going to continue with item. 4.3.

[1:41:02] This is a referral from a recent regular council meeting.

[1:41:07] This is a motion that Councilor Nuberecki bought forward. We

[1:41:13] have. The motion. Councilor Lebrechi, you have the floor. Thank

[1:41:18] you. So I guess we'll go ahead and move the

[1:41:22] motion. Talk about it. It's seconded on the tape on

[1:41:28] the table for discussion. Thank you, council Lubik. So I

[1:41:31] just want to highlight while we get into this. We

[1:41:33] just had five minutes, many people ran out of their

[1:41:36] five minutes. As of now, what we just passed combined

[1:41:39] first and second. Reading, by the way. I flagged that

[1:41:41] no one changed it. So we have one more meeting.

[1:41:43] Coming up, first and second reading combined, that will be.

[1:41:47] Five more minutes each, followed by a public hearing. With

[1:41:49] five more minutes each. They give those ten. More minutes

[1:41:52] each on the most important document working on for five

[1:41:55] years. Just throwing that out there. That, that's where it

[1:41:58] sits today, as we're having this town hall conversation. Which

[1:42:02] I don't really have much more to say because this

[1:42:04] is the fourth time we've discussed it. 's now really

[1:42:08] up to the rest of council to decide where they

[1:42:11] stand on this. Although when I hear previous comments just

[1:42:16] in previous item, it's very interesting to have that conversation.

[1:42:18] First. It feels pretty clear where everyone seems to stand,

[1:42:22] because when you start to discuss the smallest of minutia.

[1:42:27] Minutiae. I really do feel we're missing the larger point

[1:42:31] here of what we've heard from the community around. Their

[1:42:34] much bigger and much broader concerns. But saying all that.

[1:42:41] It's an important aspect of good governments that we give

[1:42:43] the community an open mic opportunity. To give us last

[1:42:46] feedback on this actual plan, which we've just received in

[1:42:50] its entirety. At least in one piece of paper form

[1:42:53] tonight. Because it represents our resident's future. And in my

[1:42:59] mind, it's just such a given that that should happen

[1:43:01] in unrestricted way. And it's what I continue advocate for,

[1:43:05] what I've been advocating for, for what the last year,

[1:43:07] I think, is laid out in this motion very clearly.

[1:43:09] If a counselor has a problem with any of the

[1:43:11] bowls laid out in the motion. I think in the

[1:43:15] community we really like to know what exactly they are

[1:43:17] because it's how we've done it for decades. Quite successfully.

[1:43:22] I will share though, especially just listening to the previous

[1:43:25] conversation about our resident. Listening to the previous conversation. My

[1:43:29] fear is the public is not seeing their feedback received

[1:43:33] that they've sent in. This draft of the OCP, and

[1:43:36] again, I'll refer to the surveys that were by far

[1:43:39] the largest engagement mechanism of this OCP. By many, many

[1:43:43] magnitudes of participation. We're talking like over 1000 respondents or

[1:43:50] more, and 50 people showed up to some of our

[1:43:54] engagement events. That's the orders of magnitude different that we're

[1:43:57] talking about, but. What? I'm not seeing those survey results,

[1:44:00] and I can't imagine the community when they read it.

[1:44:02] Unless I'm missing them somewhere. Are seeing the big picture

[1:44:05] survey results. So that's my theory. My theory is that

[1:44:09] maybe we hold this and not a lot. Of people

[1:44:11] show up again because they don't think their voices matter

[1:44:13] and they just feel will be another exercise in being

[1:44:16] ignored. But you know what? Having said all that, I'm

[1:44:21] always going to advocate for more public engagement. Always. I

[1:44:24] think that this is the right thing to do. And

[1:44:27] it's not too late for us to do things differently,

[1:44:30] given all that I've said. Maybe we can actually go

[1:44:34] into this differently, add a committee meeting. In so that

[1:44:37] we can have a town hall and it actually comes

[1:44:40] back. It's the only thing on the agenda. And we

[1:44:42] sit here as long as it takes. To walk through

[1:44:45] this document and maybe we extend our time to ten

[1:44:47] minutes each or more. I don't know so that we

[1:44:51] can actually have the space we need to get this

[1:44:53] document. Maybe not to exactly where I want to see

[1:44:57] it, but just somewhere that better represents the balance. Than.

[1:45:01] What we're seeing right now. So I have nothing more

[1:45:03] to say about this. It's with council now to hopefully

[1:45:07] move. Forward with the promised town hall to our community.

[1:45:11] Thank you, councilor. Is that it? Thank you, Marlatti. Thanks.

[1:45:18] I'm going to start off by. I put a lot

[1:45:20] of thought into the councilor's motion, and I'm going to

[1:45:23] start off by. Saying that I actually think it's a

[1:45:26] good idea. To provide one more opportunity. Outside of the

[1:45:31] process of the public hearing. To provide input. I want

[1:45:37] to say that. We want to be as inclusive as

[1:45:40] possible. I think that. There is value in looking at

[1:45:49] whether or not a virtual meeting might be better than

[1:45:51] an in person meeting given, but that's something council can

[1:45:55] decide. My suggestion would be that. We would. Actually have

[1:46:03] some ideas around this. And I think maybe setting up

[1:46:06] a committee, sort of a committee meeting where the public

[1:46:11] can attend. In person. To see similar to how we

[1:46:15] do our committees already and then have an opportunity for

[1:46:18] the public. To provide input if they choose. I don't

[1:46:23] think that we should be doing this after first reading

[1:46:26] and before second reading. I think we should be doing

[1:46:28] it on the draft before it gets sort of sent

[1:46:31] to staff. For BYLAW. For them to create the bylaws.

[1:46:37] And in fact, Tonight. We'll get some input. We've already

[1:46:42] received some input and given it to. Staff, then we'll

[1:46:45] have an opportunity. Following that to give any changes to

[1:46:50] the draft. To be then written into the bylaw. So

[1:46:55] if the councilor's motion is not. Successful. Tonight. I'll have

[1:47:01] an alternate motion, I think. I'll think about it right

[1:47:04] now and put something together that reflects a process that

[1:47:07] I've just sort of talked about. And I suggest. If

[1:47:13] we have an opportunity after. I will share that with

[1:47:18] you. Thank you, mayor. Councilor Knowles, followed by Councilor Lubic.

[1:47:23] Thank you. So. Yeah, I appreciate that. Mirlatti. Also. Well,

[1:47:30] I'm not opposed to another engagement opportunity at all. Really

[1:47:35] at all. I think it's important that, for me, it's

[1:47:37] important that we may not support any motion that's going

[1:47:39] to delay the delivery of our OCP and. Further that

[1:47:43] we not spend any more money on this, and I've

[1:47:46] made that clear. The last time we spoke about this.

[1:47:48] That's important to me and that we not put too

[1:47:51] much pressure. Further work on our staff because they've been

[1:47:56] doing a lot. They are doing a lot. And let's

[1:47:59] be clear, they've already done this work. And by that

[1:48:03] I mean staff. Completed the town hall process for the

[1:48:06] OCP that we asked. Them to do. They did the

[1:48:08] work. They provided an exhaustive and robust town hall for

[1:48:11] our community. And we shouldn't be asking them to redo

[1:48:15] the entire process. The request. Of just one counselor who

[1:48:20] thinks that if we redo it using her parameters, that

[1:48:22] the results will somehow be different because there's no guarantee

[1:48:25] that that's the case. So the sheer number of projects

[1:48:28] being discussed tonight, as these meetings, should tell you how

[1:48:31] much work in our staff has to get on with.

[1:48:33] So again, while I'm not necessarily pulled to a council

[1:48:35] led meeting. I would be looking for an alternative to

[1:48:39] the motion that's on the floor that doesn't. Leave residents

[1:48:43] who previously contributed their feedback. To the conversation, wondering why

[1:48:48] their original input wasn't good enough. And whether it was

[1:48:51] hurt. And I can tell you from my perspective, it

[1:48:53] was heard. I did. Hear them. We heard from people

[1:48:56] throughout the community with varying opinions, preferences, priorities as appropriate.

[1:49:01] And I don't know if I'm the only one, but

[1:49:02] it feels like there's some sort of insinuation here. That

[1:49:05] staff didn't do a good enough job with the OCP

[1:49:07] town hall, and I'm not okay with that. The town

[1:49:12] hall that took place offered opportunities for discussion, questions, answers.

[1:49:16] We had interactive tables. We had pollster boards, review of

[1:49:21] concepts of proposals, interactive opportunities. So, yeah, I'm happy to

[1:49:25] hear from my colleagues on what we can do here,

[1:49:28] but. This motion as presented. With designed invitations and detailed

[1:49:33] extra work of staff, including miniting. I don't think it's

[1:49:36] appropriate. So I agree with. What marriage has said. I

[1:49:40] think any additional engagement opportunity should be online only. That

[1:49:43] is the most inclusive format. And given that staff have

[1:49:48] already done this work, This should be council led, and

[1:49:52] I guess I'll leave it there. Looking forward to see

[1:49:55] how this goes. Thanks. Thank you. Councilor. Councilor lubic. Thank

[1:50:00] you very much. I'm also supportive. Maybe not the proposed

[1:50:05] format, but I'm supportive of doing another. Engagement session. I

[1:50:09] think I told council the story before of meeting a

[1:50:12] mayor from somewhere in the state, Colorado, I think. And

[1:50:18] he said that when they did their community engagement on

[1:50:21] their very different community plan, They did social engagement and

[1:50:27] quality engagement, but by the end. Everyone was like, okay,

[1:50:31] well, maybe it's not exactly what I wanted, but I

[1:50:35] see where my feedback was incorporated. I understand where my

[1:50:39] goals are reflected, even if it doesn't look exactly what

[1:50:42] I said. So I think it's any opportunity we have

[1:50:45] to engage and. To hear from people and also. Hopeful

[1:50:51] with clarity is really important. I do think this is

[1:50:56] a council priority, this OCP is. So I think. If

[1:51:02] we have our council contingency fund, if there's extra money

[1:51:04] we need to. Spend. Hopefully not a lot, but if

[1:51:07] there's extra money. Spend. I think that that is an

[1:51:11] option. And I think it's important to also make sure

[1:51:15] that when we think about this, we think about. Trying

[1:51:20] to find ways to invite diverse voices in. Obviously, we

[1:51:25] talked about this a little bit already. But this has

[1:51:28] been a very long engagement process, so I'd actually love

[1:51:31] to hear feedback. On the goals that we heard before

[1:51:35] and also. Are we meeting them now? Are the goal

[1:51:38] still the same? And I hope that there's ways that

[1:51:41] council can also ask questions. To the people who come

[1:51:46] up to try to understand. Obviously, people won't have to

[1:51:48] answer. What they want to say, and that's great, too,

[1:51:53] as well as getting fees specifically that on the sections

[1:51:55] that are important. At the. Ocp. I would love to

[1:52:01] see it be in person, to be honest. I appreciate

[1:52:05] where folks are coming from. Inclusivity online at the same

[1:52:08] time. Looking at some of the engagements we've had online

[1:52:12] in the past, the numbers are not as good as

[1:52:14] the ones in person, unless we have other ways of

[1:52:17] brought people in. So I think in person would be

[1:52:20] great. I also think again. Council contingency fund if we

[1:52:23] want. To bring food that helps people. It also puts

[1:52:25] them in better moods and tend to be more. Open

[1:52:30] to people's thoughts when we're happy and not happy. So

[1:52:35] I think that's where I'm at. I'm happy to hear

[1:52:37] about what a different format would look like. But I

[1:52:40] think that those are some of the things that are

[1:52:43] important. And I also think the introduction to a town

[1:52:47] hall. What Mr. Paulian staff have presented tonight, as well

[1:52:52] as what was in the report about what? Are the

[1:52:53] changes? Really helped set the stage. For what? The changes

[1:52:59] in associate. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor. Councilor. Ed. Tara,

[1:53:04] do you want to jump in here? I have nothing

[1:53:09] really extra to add to whatever. I just wanted to

[1:53:14] make sure you had that opportunity. I'm quite supportive of

[1:53:19] having another engagement opportunity. Our staff. We heard earlier on

[1:53:24] the previous item 17 engagement opportunities with 4000 individual. Interactions.

[1:53:31] That's huge. And I see a survey, I see a

[1:53:35] walking tour. As all unique opportunities and. I treat them

[1:53:40] all as different pieces in a larger jigsaw puzzle. I

[1:53:44] don't. See one as being more important than all of

[1:53:48] the others. I think staff have done an exceptional job

[1:53:52] to. Now, I agree with the mayor that I think

[1:53:55] if we were to have this additional session before first

[1:53:58] reading. It really does send that message. That we are

[1:54:01] opening. We are open to listening and making changes. Before

[1:54:06] the OCP would come back for a first reading. I

[1:54:08] think that makes sense. I'm wondering. We're trying to make

[1:54:16] this. The recommendations seem to be quite formal, and I

[1:54:19] wonder if. There's an opportunity. To provide a more casual

[1:54:23] opportunity for our residents and I don't know. What that

[1:54:28] would look like. I think one engagement we have where

[1:54:31] council was sitting on the steps. Of the stage, and

[1:54:35] it was with youth, and it just removed sort of

[1:54:38] the barriers that existed. Yeah. I'm not fussed by this

[1:54:44] at all. The only thing that does fuss me is.

[1:54:46] This designed invitation. We've done design invitations for Golden Spike

[1:54:52] Awards, and I worry about doing something so exceptional. Just

[1:54:58] for this one session. I mean, if we got 1200

[1:55:00] responses to a survey that was part of the engagement.

[1:55:05] Without a special invitation. I'm sure we can drum up

[1:55:09] support as well. So I'm open to hearing. Any amendments.

[1:55:16] If need be. I can certainly move the amendment. That

[1:55:20] the council town hall on the OCP be scheduled prior

[1:55:24] to first reading. Amending that. First. That. I see a

[1:55:30] seconder for that. Amy has seconded that. Any discussion on

[1:55:36] having it before first reading or after first reading. Okay,

[1:55:41] I'm going to. Call the question on the amendment. All

[1:55:43] in favor of having this before first reading? Against. That

[1:55:51] passes. Thank you, everybody. Mary Lauderda, you had indicated you

[1:55:55] might have some other changes. Marlotti, you've got the floor.

[1:56:03] No, I have an alternate motion. I think that. I'm

[1:56:08] not interested in wordsmithing. I have an ultimate motion is

[1:56:12] if this motion does not pass, I will have an

[1:56:15] alternate motion. Okay, I see other hands up. Okay, we've

[1:56:23] got an amended motion before us. I'm going to call

[1:56:26] the question. On it. All in favor? Against. That is

[1:56:34] defeated with three people. So. Apologies. Chairperson. I saw a

[1:56:43] delay of councilor lubic. Was it Councilor Lubic Kumar Lottie?

[1:56:47] Councilor Knowles, Councilor Agtrap, opposed? That is my reading of

[1:56:52] the room as well. Perfect. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay,

[1:56:55] so that has been defeated. Sorry about that, Councilor Becky.

[1:57:00] Mayor, you have an alternate motion. Thank you. I've just

[1:57:08] texted it to the clerk. Oh, I should have just

[1:57:11] texted it to everybody. Sorry, not text. Sent it in

[1:57:16] the chat. So the motion is that a special committee

[1:57:20] of counsel. The special committee meeting of council be held

[1:57:25] for the public to provide input on the draft 2050.

[1:57:28] OCP document prior to first reading and that the engage

[1:57:32] port Moody OCP site be updated to notify the community

[1:57:36] of this meeting and following this meeting council provide final

[1:57:39] direction for the preparation of the OCP bylaws. I see

[1:57:43] that moved. Is there a second? Seconded by Councilor Knowles.

[1:57:49] Councilor Knowles, you have your hand up. Can I speak

[1:57:51] to. That. Sorry. That's okay. Yeah, I wanted to just.

[1:57:57] I do appreciate. The previous motion, however, I felt that

[1:58:02] I feel. That. We have timing, and we also have

[1:58:08] expense. For things like special invitations. I'm not terribly fussed.

[1:58:14] I mean, I did mention virtual. In my comments earlier.

[1:58:20] I'm okay with it being in public. I just want

[1:58:21] to make sure that. We have an opportunity for anybody

[1:58:25] who wants to provide input. What happens sometimes at these

[1:58:30] public meetings? Is that people don't feel comfortable saying what

[1:58:34] they want to say. And it could be somebody who

[1:58:38] is very supportive of the document, or not supportive, for

[1:58:41] that matter. Who might feel uncomfortable providing input. That was

[1:58:47] kind of what I was thinking. I agree. Councilor Lubit

[1:58:51] with council Lubic's. Comments that we want to get. A

[1:58:55] diverse number of people as possible. But. We have to

[1:59:00] also not lose sight of the fact that. This is,

[1:59:04] as was said earlier, this is our document now. We

[1:59:09] need to send something to staff. We need to do

[1:59:13] this. If we do this. We are cognizant that this

[1:59:18] will not. Meet the provincial deadline, right? We won't get

[1:59:22] this across the finish line by December and. I'm okay

[1:59:24] with that. I think the province will have to accept

[1:59:29] that I'm sure we're not the only municipality that isn't

[1:59:31] going to be crossing that finish. Line by December. But.

[1:59:37] There are some things that we are asking staff to

[1:59:39] do. So. I do not want to put any more

[1:59:43] burden on staff. This is not something that staff should

[1:59:47] be miniting. This is not something that staff should be

[1:59:50] taking notes on. This is something that council should be

[1:59:53] there to hear and listen and provide resultant feedback. For

[1:59:59] the end result of the document after that meeting. And

[2:00:03] that is very in line with how we've done things

[2:00:05] in the past. We typically, as councilor, As councilor Dilworth

[2:00:12] pointed out, what we've done in the past. Was we

[2:00:17] had us lined up right in front of the stage,

[2:00:19] so. We were down at the bottom and we basically

[2:00:24] were going through the document and. We then provided feedback

[2:00:29] during that meeting, and we had the public also provide

[2:00:32] feedback at that meeting. Which gave us real time opportunity

[2:00:37] to make notes and provide feedback. And then. I think

[2:00:44] that would be a workable thing. As long as we

[2:00:46] know that. This is not going to place more burden

[2:00:50] on staff and that this is not going. To. And.

[2:00:56] This is not going to get completed by December 2025.

[2:00:59] That's it. Thank you, mayor. Councilor Knowles, followed by councilor

[2:01:05] Lubic. There you go. Yeah. Thank you. Mirluddy answered the

[2:01:12] question that I had put my hand up about and

[2:01:14] that was about online versus in person. While I would

[2:01:18] prefer online because I think this could go very long.

[2:01:23] And that's tough after a full day of work. For

[2:01:27] those of us who work full time. I'm not necessarily

[2:01:31] post doing it in person. I would hope that even

[2:01:36] though this won't be staffled, That we can. Ask residents

[2:01:43] who are free, just say whatever they'd like just to

[2:01:45] at least keep the topic to the OCP. I do

[2:01:48] worry about it getting off track. And devolving somewhat so.

[2:01:56] As long as there are some. Clear parameters for this.

[2:01:59] I can get behind this motion and support it, so

[2:02:02] I'll leave. That there. Thank you, Councilor Lubber. Followed by

[2:02:05] Councilor Lorbecky. Thank you. Very much. So I like the

[2:02:10] idea of this being. A committee meeting. Special committee meeting.

[2:02:16] I do think it's the special committee meeting and I

[2:02:18] might have just misheard. But we usually do at least.

[2:02:24] For. Meaning have some live streaming and call in functions.

[2:02:31] So I just want to clarify that that would still

[2:02:33] be part of. Even if we're not doing minutes, we're

[2:02:36] still looking. To have something that people can look at,

[2:02:40] people are able to call, and so if it's, hybrid,

[2:02:42] then we're kind of doing the best of both worlds.

[2:02:44] Which sever? Several. Tick off some of the boxes in

[2:02:52] the original. Motion as far as live screening and recording

[2:03:00] and going as long as it needs to. I know

[2:03:05] sometimes these things do a little extraordinarily long, but I

[2:03:07] do think it's important that we hear from folks and

[2:03:10] they feel as welcome as possible. To stay and make

[2:03:13] sure that the questions are heard. And I guess I'm

[2:03:17] also wondering. We definitely put this on the engagement website.

[2:03:22] But I also want to know if. We're not doing

[2:03:28] citywide mail loans. What are the other opportunities? To promote

[2:03:35] this. Not everybody goes. To engage port Moody so city,

[2:03:39] social media. Opportunities to. Do. Not a lot of extra

[2:03:45] work for staff, but to be able to send out.

[2:03:49] A notification to some of the civic groups that we

[2:03:52] work very closely with to help. Get people out. Even

[2:03:56] places like share the tricity lift. So those are some

[2:04:01] of my comments that I'd like to see included in

[2:04:03] this. If it goes forward and just get clarity that.

[2:04:07] Would. Like to make a motion to that, or is

[2:04:10] everybody okay with that? I would certainly support a hybrid.

[2:04:14] Ms. Lamb. Is that something you think we should articulate

[2:04:17] as an amendment to the motion. Thank you, chairperson. I

[2:04:22] believe that we can note it as direction if it's

[2:04:23] going to be a meeting, then we would include it

[2:04:26] anyways. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Are you done, Councilor

[2:04:33] Lubic? I am, unless I forgot something. Thank you. Councilor

[2:04:39] Lebecki. Thank you. So. I'm trying to understand the circle

[2:04:46] we are going in here. So we went from purposely.

[2:04:49] Prescriptive, and then I'm hearing comments putting you back in

[2:04:52] what I had even though we voted it down. But

[2:04:56] the motion remains vague, which is similar to previous motions,

[2:04:59] which got us to the situation, to begin with. Which

[2:05:01] is why it has a list of very specific things,

[2:05:04] like ensuring it was hybrid. If I am the public

[2:05:08] watching this, I'm like, what's going on here? Let's just

[2:05:12] be, like, crystal, crystal clear, and I will move an

[2:05:16] amendment to this. Because I think that's what we need.

[2:05:20] This is going to be a hybrid meeting that we

[2:05:22] will be located in the chambers that there is going

[2:05:25] to be an open mic format that this is going

[2:05:28] to be live streamed for those to watch. I heard.

[2:05:32] The only thing I actually heard issue was the timing

[2:05:35] of things, which I agreed on. Changing. That's great. Earlier

[2:05:37] the better. And then not mailing out an invitation, which

[2:05:40] just. Could have been an amendment. Anyhow. Do I need

[2:05:45] to move an amendment that this is a hybrid meeting

[2:05:48] with live streaming with council. Up on the stage with

[2:05:52] an open mic format. I just asked the kirk that

[2:05:58] question, and she confirmed that it doesn't need a motion.

[2:06:01] That they are listening and they have heard and that

[2:06:03] this will be a hybrid meeting. Okay. That question has

[2:06:09] been asked and answered already. Again because it's the fourth

[2:06:12] time. Just wanting to restate. I appreciate that. We're. All

[2:06:16] clear. That's what's going to happen. And the only thing

[2:06:18] I'm hearing then is different is the timing. That council

[2:06:22] is not supportive of a mail out and I guess

[2:06:25] not wanting to use staff resources. For minutes, but is

[2:06:29] going to be live, stream and captured for our community.

[2:06:32] Who wants to watch? And go back and watch it.

[2:06:35] I just captured the changes accordingly. That's fine. I can

[2:06:39] support that. Like I said, I want to support those

[2:06:41] amendments, so. That is what we're voting on right now.

[2:06:44] Then I support that. And I appreciate council. Support for

[2:06:47] moving ahead with. This critical opportunity to hear directly from

[2:06:51] our community. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor. Councilor Knowles. Yeah.

[2:06:57] Just a question that I wanted to clarify, since we're

[2:07:00] clarifying. And I don't know how the rest of council

[2:07:03] feels about this, but. I would prefer. Just ticking in

[2:07:07] the input as counsel. I think if we're doing back

[2:07:11] and forth, we're looking at it at 810. 12 hours.

[2:07:15] What I would like to do is hear the input,

[2:07:18] make my own notes, add that to the rest of

[2:07:20] the feedback and everything else that we've already heard, but

[2:07:22] if we're going to be going back and forth with

[2:07:24] every person who comes up. I think that's going to

[2:07:26] be way too long, so I just want to clarify.

[2:07:29] What is the level of interaction that is expected? The

[2:07:34] motion that's on the table. Thank you. Mayor Lottie, do

[2:07:38] you want to clarify your motion? Well. I think maybe

[2:07:43] this is. Where we differ in our vision for this,

[2:07:48] because I do not see this being a public hearing.

[2:07:50] Format. It's a meeting so public will have an opportunity

[2:07:56] to provide their input. And then counsel will hear it.

[2:08:03] And then. We will make. A decision on how we

[2:08:07] move forward from there. At the meeting, it'll be similar

[2:08:10] to tonight's meeting, I would think. In that the community

[2:08:16] has an opportunity to provide input at the beginning of

[2:08:19] the meeting, and we can extend it as long as.

[2:08:23] They continue to have input. And then. We will see

[2:08:29] where we stand after that. That's my vision. I'm not

[2:08:35] envisioning this to be a public hearing format. Where we

[2:08:39] are responding. To every or where people are coming up

[2:08:42] to a mic and then we're responding. Perhaps. Maybe that's

[2:08:47] where the difference is. We can certainly answer questions. I

[2:08:50] think we should. For clarity, if there's a question specific

[2:08:55] to the document that a member of the public wants

[2:08:58] answered, I suppose. We could look to staff to answer

[2:09:01] a question and provide clarity, and staff will be there

[2:09:04] to provide clarity for our questions, for sure. Thank you.

[2:09:09] Thank you for that. Councilor Lubic, I believe you have

[2:09:17] two minutes left in your speaking time. Thank you. It

[2:09:21] won't take that long. Just to. Echo what was said.

[2:09:29] I think. And for clarity, I think it would be

[2:09:30] really helpful to have staff present to ask I think

[2:09:34] council will want to answer your questions, but staff are

[2:09:37] the ones who've written. This document, and they are the

[2:09:39] content experts and they know things. Like policy 2.5.6. This

[2:09:46] means that I wish I had that, but I went

[2:09:50] to a couple of them, so I. Think it's really

[2:09:52] important that we do have staff there that are able

[2:09:55] to answer questions. For people, too, so. They're not just

[2:09:59] feeling frustrated. Some people will just want to vote vocalist.

[2:10:02] And some people will actually want clarity on what certain

[2:10:04] things mean. We did. So I think it's important. We

[2:10:07] have those that always make us look good, don't they?

[2:10:11] I don't see any other hands up, so I'm going

[2:10:13] to call the question. On this motion. And staff can

[2:10:17] get back to us with potential dates for our calendars

[2:10:21] and for promotion of this event throughout our community by

[2:10:25] way of social media. Using our billboard. Billboards, et cetera,

[2:10:32] et cetera, et cetera. We are all seeing the motion

[2:10:36] up on the screen. All in favor? Against. I see

[2:10:42] that that was unanimous. Thank you. We have one item

[2:10:45] left, people. Do we think we can get this done

[2:10:48] in the next 15 minutes or so. This is item

[2:10:52] 4.4 that was added to the agenda. This was a

[2:10:57] letter from Westgroup exploring. A significant addition of affordable housing

[2:11:02] to the inlet district. We heard from a member public

[2:11:06] at public input on this, and we've had some correspondence.

[2:11:11] From staff who've been having. A number of discussions with

[2:11:16] the mayor with recommendations on how to best facilitate the

[2:11:22] best outcomes that the applicant and that the city wants

[2:11:26] Merlotti. I see your hand up. Thank you. I appreciate

[2:11:34] the opportunity. To speak to this, and I appreciated staff

[2:11:38] earlier information. To counsel. Around, sort of. What this looks

[2:11:46] like and what this doesn't look like. So I know

[2:11:49] that there has been some. We received the letter and.

[2:11:54] I guess that will form part of the public record.

[2:11:58] From west group requesting that we expedited timeline so that

[2:12:01] they can meet the deadlines. For CMHC funding for affordable

[2:12:05] housing. And I'm okay with doing that. If the end

[2:12:14] result is affordable housing. But I want people to be

[2:12:17] really clear that this does not in any way obligate

[2:12:19] us. To prove added density after the fact that. 'll

[2:12:26] have to go through a process. And if it doesn't

[2:12:28] happen, then it doesn't. Happen, but at least we can't

[2:12:31] be seen to be sort of holding up. A process.

[2:12:36] That they've asked us, that we've asked them to come

[2:12:37] back with. So I would like to move that staff,

[2:12:42] be directed to process. To expedite a

[2:12:52] process to allow for a text amendment to incorporate market

[2:12:55] and affordable rental units in phase a and relocate the

[2:12:59] office space to either phase b or c with no

[2:13:03] overall change in density on the development. Thank you. Again.

[2:13:11] I know that there will be future discussions. Around. What

[2:13:16] those changes might entail. Around. I know that Westgoop came

[2:13:20] and talked about additional density, but they also talked about

[2:13:24] some other things that I'm not sure that this council

[2:13:26] would support. Again, I want to make sure that. We

[2:13:30] aren't standing in the way that we aren't accused of.

[2:13:34] Asking for affordable housing. And then not providing a path

[2:13:39] forward for them to achieve that. And so that is

[2:13:43] why I'm putting this forward. Have you got that written,

[2:13:47] and can you provide that? No, I haven't, but I

[2:13:51] will. Do that right now. Okay. Thank you. Are you

[2:13:54] finished? Yeah, that's it. I would like to hear what

[2:14:00] the rest of council has to say. About it. Thanks.

[2:14:03] Thank you. I have Councilor Lereki followed by councillor Lubic.

[2:14:07] Thank. You chair. Well, that was going to be my

[2:14:09] question. What exactly? I heard part of the motion. But

[2:14:12] my understanding is just to recap again, because the public

[2:14:15] has not seen anything. They've amended agenda. There's no materials.

[2:14:21] We received a letter from west group that I understand

[2:14:23] will be on table and published, basically asking. To swap

[2:14:29] out some of the existing density. In their first phase

[2:14:35] of their development. To allow for the inclusion of more

[2:14:39] rentals and more affordable housing. Business office space being delayed

[2:14:45] to. A future stage of the development, and the mayor

[2:14:52] has moved a motion that we expedite. That process to

[2:14:56] consider that request. Have I captured that correctly? You have

[2:14:59] captured that absolutely correctly, councilor. Okay. Thank you. This was

[2:15:05] a request for more density. I would obviously not be

[2:15:08] supportive. I'm supportive of this because. It is hopefully going

[2:15:15] to facilitate desperately needed affordable housing in this development that

[2:15:19] currently has zero units. And was passed that way. I

[2:15:24] am extremely concerned, however, about kicking off much needed. Business

[2:15:31] space. To a future phase because we know that when

[2:15:36] you bring more resins into a higher density, development, and

[2:15:39] we don't want them to use a car. We have

[2:15:42] to give them spaces. To work, and I'm worried that

[2:15:45] if we kick off one of these amenities that we.

[2:15:47] Negotiate. That was negotiated around. This very critical business space

[2:15:52] to another phase that we're just going to re go

[2:15:55] through. This process again. I think I heard a comment

[2:16:00] when someone from the proponent had called in, basically saying

[2:16:04] that if we didn't do this, there would be no

[2:16:07] market. There is something. I'm paraphrasing. But no market. For

[2:16:12] the condo development as proposed and no foreseeable recovery. When

[2:16:17] I hear something like that. I look at that site

[2:16:20] and I'm like, well, the whole thing is now clear

[2:16:22] cut. How did that happen? And now we're having these

[2:16:25] conversations about trying to make sure something gets built. So

[2:16:28] these are the questions. Are asking. We talk a lot

[2:16:33] about process and good faith and not moving the goalposts.

[2:16:38] And I think that when we look at this request,

[2:16:43] This is for a net benefit per share. There's a

[2:16:44] cost and a risk, which is? Delaying another needed amenity,

[2:16:48] which is the office space. So I'll support this moving

[2:16:52] forward. I'm concerned about this. And I guess the future

[2:16:57] will really tell how this actually ends. Up going and

[2:17:01] what the outcome is on this site, because right now

[2:17:03] the outcome is a completely clear cut piece of land

[2:17:07] with nothing on it. Thank you, councilor. Loreki, you asked

[2:17:11] the question. How did we get to the point of

[2:17:13] having a clear cut. And that was the previous council

[2:17:16] made a directive that all the roadways be underground and

[2:17:19] that the site. Thank you, Councilor Lubic. Followed by Councilor

[2:17:25] Eggtrap. Thank you very much. Yes, I'll be supportive. As

[2:17:34] I tried to be honest with council and the public

[2:17:36] about my biggest regret with coordination part is that we

[2:17:40] didn't get affordable housing, and I think this is the

[2:17:42] opportunity. To rectify that. Just for clarity, there is one

[2:17:49] rental building at its rent to own, which is weird

[2:17:52] but cool. So that is a good thing in that

[2:17:56] development. But we need more housing desperately, and if we

[2:18:00] can get both market and low market. That's really important

[2:18:04] right now. We're not. Being asked for any extra density,

[2:18:07] so hopefully that's positive to the community. When we first

[2:18:16] saw this come to council, there was a number of

[2:18:19] questions about recovering some of the costs of dccs and

[2:18:23] things like that. We're not hearing that right now. So

[2:18:26] hopefully that won't come to pass. And this is something

[2:18:30] that. We can see as a positive for our community

[2:18:33] moving forward. We did talk about. There's a question about

[2:18:37] how did we come to be here? It was with

[2:18:42] the trees. And although, as I mentioned before, I'm very

[2:18:45] sad to see all of them go. I do think

[2:18:47] it's going to be wonderful to have no roads. In

[2:18:49] that area and to have a very good park in

[2:18:52] the middle of it. We talked about the OCP earlier.

[2:18:57] And one thing that I think is really important that

[2:18:59] we included in all of the sections, including any future

[2:19:02] sections of Coronation Park. Is inclusionary zoning because we didn't

[2:19:07] have that at that point. So it was a nice

[2:19:10] to have, not a must have, and now it's a

[2:19:12] must. Have. So thank you very much, and I look

[2:19:17] forward to next steps and hopefully. Will be promising. Great.

[2:19:22] Thank you, Councilor Lubic. Councilor. Egg trap? Thank you. I

[2:19:25] just. Have a couple of questions for staff. One is,

[2:19:28] I heard. That the speaker from West Group say that.

[2:19:35] 25% of the units will be affordable, and we talk

[2:19:37] a lot about affordable and the spectrum. Of housing. I

[2:19:42] think portable means different things to different people. So what

[2:19:45] does that mean in this? Context. What is affordable means.

[2:19:49] I think given that it's a CMHC application, it is

[2:19:52] probably using the definition of affordability that CMHC uses. I

[2:19:57] don't know if there's Suzanne, do you want to jump

[2:20:00] in and confirm that? Sure? Yes. Through the chair. It

[2:20:05] is tied to a CMHC program. As councilor Dilworth, the

[2:20:09] chair refers my understanding. Is. There are higher rates than

[2:20:15] our below market rental rates. Like our lower end, but

[2:20:19] they are lower than market rental rates. That makes sense.

[2:20:24] So my understanding is approximately they could be in the

[2:20:26] range of one $800 a month versus the much lower

[2:20:30] end, however. Not as high as pure market rates. And

[2:20:34] this is based on the CMHC program that they have

[2:20:37] identified where CHC is setting these rates for the 21

[2:20:42] year period and so forth, so they have certain parameters.

[2:20:47] Okay, thank you. And then that would last. You said

[2:20:48] 21 years. 21 years is a program that. CMHC has

[2:20:52] outlined. Yes. That's tied to this, okay? And then as

[2:20:56] far as next step, so. This passes tonight. Because it

[2:21:01] seems like the CMHC is requiring this to be done,

[2:21:05] and then what we see development permit application. We vote

[2:21:11] on that, or what's the next step in this process?

[2:21:15] Yeah. So there is a current application that, as you'll

[2:21:17] all be aware, has been approved. In terms of the

[2:21:19] zoning. So for phase one of that application, the development

[2:21:22] permit will be forthcoming. Next week based on its current

[2:21:25] trajectory. So if council chooses to go down this path,

[2:21:31] To try to incorporate the request by west group. We

[2:21:34] would be looking. To proceed with a text amendment to

[2:21:37] adjust the zoning. To adjust. The office space into a

[2:21:42] feature phase to incorporate the affordable housing components and to

[2:21:47] tie that up. In terms of the zoning they would

[2:21:48] need to then come forward. With an amendment to their

[2:21:51] development permit to deal with the foreign character of shifting

[2:21:55] an office building. To rental. There would also be a

[2:21:59] future OCP amendment and rezoning application. For the proposal outlined

[2:22:05] in May that Westgrip brought forward, which was part of

[2:22:09] a density increase request in order to support the rental

[2:22:13] housing which was outlined in our sort of phased series.

[2:22:16] Of requests. So the request here today is to try

[2:22:19] and keep the path moving forward on the affordable housing.

[2:22:24] Component and to move office to the future phase, there

[2:22:27] would be a subsequent future application by Westgroup to facilitate

[2:22:31] all of the other elements. Okay. Thanks for that. Yeah.

[2:22:35] And we're accelerating. The text amendment so we can meet

[2:22:40] CMHC deadlife so we can get. That affordable housing councilor

[2:22:46] Knowles. Yes. Thank you. I'm really excited that we are

[2:22:51] in this situation. It was devastating last term when the

[2:22:56] council of the day decided. To choose lower density as

[2:23:00] opposed to affordable housing, which is what brought us here.

[2:23:05] The timeline on that is very clear. But. This council,

[2:23:09] I think, in its wisdom, agreed to move forward the

[2:23:12] zoning with the understanding that west group would provide a

[2:23:15] letter of intent that they would do their best to

[2:23:18] add affordable housing in subsequent phases, and here we are.

[2:23:21] Now we're in the first phase and we're doing it,

[2:23:23] so this is awesome. And I will just say moving

[2:23:27] of the gold post is exactly what got us here

[2:23:29] in the first place. So if anything, we're trying to

[2:23:31] correct that problem. The one thing I wanted to say

[2:23:35] is. I'm not super fussed at all about the office

[2:23:41] based situation and the reason for that is because the

[2:23:43] Suterbrook office tower building sat empty for years, and I

[2:23:46] believe at this time. It is currently still half empty.

[2:23:51] So I am very glad that that is the trade

[2:23:53] off that we're making here, and on that note. I

[2:23:57] actually have a proposed amendment, if I may. I would

[2:24:00] like to amend the mayor's motion that relocate the office

[2:24:03] space to another phase. In phase b or c or

[2:24:06] d. With no overall change in density on the development

[2:24:10] because. I would like to give Westgroup as much flexibility

[2:24:13] as possible so that we can get this done. Do

[2:24:17] I have a seconder for that amendment? Council. Seconded.

[2:24:28] I'll add that I think flexibility. Is important, and I

[2:24:31] have to tell you. Having the experience of having gone

[2:24:35] through. Decades of buildouts of our bigger developments. Again, I

[2:24:41] can never say it enough. Soderbrook it was 40 years

[2:24:44] from start to end. There's always going to be changes

[2:24:47] in. Hiccups. And things that go on, and I have

[2:24:50] always been confident that we were going to get affordable

[2:24:53] housing and more rental on that property, just like moving.

[2:24:57] Forward with other applications. We may get more rental. More

[2:25:03] rent to own. As councilor Lubic referenced earlier, This is

[2:25:08] a hiccup. Across the way there was hiccups with Newport.

[2:25:11] There's. Going to be hiccups and things change as we

[2:25:14] move over. And what might be a 25, 30, 40

[2:25:19] year build out of this particular project. Things are going

[2:25:23] to change again, and it's just what to accept in

[2:25:26] any process, so. I will support the amendment for flexibility.

[2:25:33] Because I know things change. It might come back sooner.

[2:25:36] It might come back later. Anyways, we got councilor lubic.

[2:25:41] Thank you very much. As I can. Did for discussion,

[2:25:49] but I'm actually not in favor. I do think that.

[2:25:56] I appreciate flexibility. At the same time, if we want

[2:25:59] to get people out of their cars, I do think

[2:26:01] it's important to have that employment space. And I think

[2:26:05] moving it to a future phase is fine by me,

[2:26:08] but I would like to see that sooner than later

[2:26:12] where possible. So I'd like to keep it where it

[2:26:15] is. So it won't be supporting the comments. Marlati. You

[2:26:19] have some time left. Yeah. Thank you. No, this is

[2:26:21] on the amendment. And I'm not going to take it

[2:26:26] all, but I do want to ask staff. I base

[2:26:32] my. Motion on a staff recommendation on how that should

[2:26:38] be worded, so I'd like to know why they did

[2:26:41] not include safety. And similar to councilor lubic. I think

[2:26:49] we're giving a lot of flexibility by moving it out

[2:26:52] of phase A and. I'm not necessarily supportive of adding

[2:26:57] d in, so I'd like to hear from staff, if

[2:26:59] I may. Thank you. Yes, thank you. Through the chair.

[2:27:05] In terms of flexibility because. The density does need. To

[2:27:11] net out sort of like accounting tables in terms of

[2:27:13] you move office from one phase to another phase, and

[2:27:16] then the residential needs to kind of swap around. And

[2:27:19] there is a limitation on how much residential can move

[2:27:22] from one phase to another. We may need some flexibility

[2:27:25] just to ensure that perhaps there could be direction to

[2:27:28] move it to. As latest stage as possible. If that

[2:27:31] was the direction. But we would need to see how

[2:27:32] those numbers land. I would also note that the final

[2:27:36] stage would have office facing probably the lowest priority roadway

[2:27:42] in terms of location. For drive in terms of lease

[2:27:46] traffic, just as some context for your consideration. Okay. Thank

[2:27:49] you. That's helpful. Yeah. So I'm not going to support

[2:27:52] the amendment. No offense, counselor Knowles. But I feel like

[2:27:55] we need to give that flexibility to staff to really.

[2:28:01] Sort of massage out. The best of this scenario. Thank

[2:28:06] you. And I see Ms. Annan also has her hand

[2:28:09] up. Ms annon. Yes. Thank you. So, to build. On

[2:28:17] what Ms. Smith articulated. Well, Part of it. I think

[2:28:21] some of the importance here of being able. To not

[2:28:25] leave things too broad is staff has been asked to

[2:28:28] do this on an expedited timeline. And to do this

[2:28:30] quickly. And the way the zoning bylaw is set up,

[2:28:33] right now. It's very specific about. Amount of residential and

[2:28:39] office and where they're located. And the more we want

[2:28:41] to make this broad, the more we're going to have

[2:28:44] to pull apart that bylaw and. Rewrite it. As Ms.

[2:28:49] Smith said, we would recommend that we keep this change

[2:28:52] as concise as possible. So we can meet the timelines

[2:28:55] that have been requested. And it doesn't mean down the

[2:28:57] road that another text amendment application can't come forward. If

[2:29:01] there needs to be an additional change to accommodate whatever's

[2:29:05] happening at that time, so. I just also wanted to

[2:29:09] be able to point that out, that. We are up

[2:29:12] against, of course, the time crunch as well here, and

[2:29:15] Ms. Mis review was trying to identify the way we

[2:29:17] can move this forward with the least amendments. To that

[2:29:20] zone so that we can, like I said, meet those

[2:29:23] October 31 deadline that was requested. Okay. Thank you for

[2:29:27] that. Thank you, Ms. Ann and councilor Lobecki. Thank you.

[2:29:31] My only comment on this is what is the saying

[2:29:33] given inch take mile. Not supporting this. I do have

[2:29:38] a quick question, actually, through the staff, though. Everything we're

[2:29:42] talking about right now. Is this a guarantee or is

[2:29:44] this an application? Are we talking about a guaranteed component

[2:29:47] of portable housing tonight? Are we talking about moving all

[2:29:50] this? Stuff around to support an application that could possibly

[2:29:54] happen for affordable housing. Yes, to the charity councilor Lobecki.

[2:30:00] So this is in support of a text amendment? To

[2:30:03] enable. The additional rental and to move the office, whether

[2:30:07] or not. That successfully gets west group their application for

[2:30:12] the construction funding through CMHC, which is part of what

[2:30:16] this is tied to, we don't have control over. But

[2:30:19] the proposed tax amendment would put in place a requirement

[2:30:22] to construct the affordable and market rental units as part

[2:30:26] of this phase. If supported by council. If approved. Thank

[2:30:31] you. So what you're saying is. Moving ahead with this

[2:30:35] change. Creates a requirement that allows for this application to

[2:30:40] proceed, but they are not actually connected. So we would

[2:30:43] be moving ahead with this requirement. In that period. What

[2:30:48] I'm saying is, if this does not actually happen, Is

[2:30:53] Westgroup now required to fulfill this commitment? Or are we

[2:30:56] just making space for something that might happen with the

[2:30:59] supportable housing component. Sorry, I'm just not quite clear on

[2:31:02] that. Yes, through the chair. So through this application process,

[2:31:06] we would be amending the development agreement, so. We'd be

[2:31:08] amending the zoning bylaw and also the development agreement, securing.

[2:31:13] The housing units with a housing agreement bylaw. So as

[2:31:17] part of getting to the approval of the proposed zoning

[2:31:20] amendment, the applicant would need to agree to that housing

[2:31:23] agreement or securing the provision of those units, so it

[2:31:27] would be tied to this approval process. Which is tied

[2:31:30] to the cmhc funding. West Group has made this application

[2:31:36] to CMHC to get this lower cost construction financing. So.

[2:31:43] We don't have control over whether or not they'll secure

[2:31:45] it. They're looking at this fast track timeline, because my

[2:31:48] understanding is that CMHC has advised them that if they

[2:31:51] can get this zoning in place by the end of

[2:31:54] October, then they could make it to a board meeting

[2:31:57] in order to be considered and that they're kind of

[2:31:59] in the queue. For the funding, but until they have

[2:32:02] the zoning in place, It's not locked down. So that

[2:32:04] is part of the reason that there's this. Expedited process

[2:32:07] to try and get to that point, to secure the

[2:32:09] financing. Okay, does that make it clear for you. I

[2:32:13] just want to follow up. If that is not, could

[2:32:15] that not. Be successful. Could we redo this zoning and

[2:32:19] they go to the CMHC board? Meaning that. You just

[2:32:21] said or something like that, and that. Is not successful.

[2:32:24] That last financing piece, is that a possibility? Through the

[2:32:29] charity. Yes. I mean, CMHC could choose not to give

[2:32:31] them that funding. They would. Then need to go out

[2:32:33] and try and secure that funding through a bank and

[2:32:37] could potentially have a better chance with having. Well, actually,

[2:32:40] I shouldn't say. I don't know whether my understanding is

[2:32:43] they're having some challenges securing funding with the office component

[2:32:46] as part of it, but that would be up to.

[2:32:49] Westgirt to figure out how to finance the project, but

[2:32:51] the development rights would be tied. To provision of. That

[2:32:55] rental housing in order to proceed or they need to

[2:32:58] come back for. Another reconsideration of other changes. Okay. Thank

[2:33:01] you. That's what I wanted to hear. So that's what

[2:33:04] we're doing, and I'm very glad to hear. That. That

[2:33:08] is the chicken before the egg, and that's the process

[2:33:11] that we're taking. To require this for the rezoning, so.

[2:33:14] Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Agtera. I was just going

[2:33:19] to say to make this crystal clear. We're making a

[2:33:23] change that. Is saying. Affordable housing, swapping out the office

[2:33:27] space for affordable and rental housing. And that is a

[2:33:31] required once we make that change, it's a requirement, and

[2:33:35] that is not dependent on west group. Receiving CMHC funding.

[2:33:38] That's now. We've made it a requirement of the development.

[2:33:41] Permit application. Correct. Through the chair. That's correct. Yeah. So

[2:33:46] I'm totally fine with this, thanks. Thank you so. We

[2:33:52] are currently actually on the amendment to include phase D

[2:33:55] as part of the motion, I'm going to call the

[2:33:57] question on the amendment. All in favor? Against. That is

[2:34:04] unanimously defeated. So, back to the original motion, as recommended

[2:34:08] by staff, and is put forward. On the table by

[2:34:11] Marlotti. Do we have that yet on the screen, Ms.

[2:34:15] Lam? We're just going to pull it up. Thank you.

[2:34:19] I appreciate that.

[2:34:28] Okay, so there it is. I'm going to call the

[2:34:31] question on that. Everybody's had a good kick at the

[2:34:34] can here. All in favor? Opposed. I see that that

[2:34:42] has been endorsed unanimously. Okay. We are now at Rise

[2:34:49] and report referral of city initiatives and planning committee resolutions.

[2:34:54] Do I have a mover of rise and report. And

[2:34:59] seconded. All in favor? Carried. Thank you. My portion of

[2:35:03] the evening. Is done, and I'm going to turn this

[2:35:06] back to the mayor, who's likely going to call a

[2:35:08] dinner break. Yes. Well done, counselor. Now we will recess

[2:35:14] for dinner. Is that the correct terminology, Madam clerk? Yes,

[2:35:18] ma'am. Okay. And we will reconvene. And head. Into our

[2:35:26] strategic planning committee. So what time is it? Is it

[2:35:31] 733? So 83 or eight five, let's say. Will reconvene.

[2:35:37] Thank you. Thank you.

[3:07:05] Back from their dinner break, it looks like. Are we

[3:07:09] okay to get going, Madam Clerk? We are. We're just

[3:07:11] missing councilor Lubis. But we can start. Yes. Okay. There

[3:07:17] she is. Okay. So I will call the Strategic Priorities

[3:07:24] Committee meeting to order. First item as adoption of the

[3:07:27] agenda. All in favor? Opposed? Carried unanimously. Thank you. Next

[3:07:36] item is the minutes and. These are the minutes from.

[3:07:44] June 10 to remover in a second. Moved and seconded.

[3:07:48] All in favor? Opposed? Carried. Thank you. Next item, 4.1,

[3:07:55] which. Is the strategic priorities intake for July. This is

[3:08:00] a regular standing item that comes onto this agenda. Does

[3:08:06] have any questions or move the motion to receive. Sorry.

[3:08:15] The motion been moved. Councilor lubic. Secondary.

[3:08:27] Yeah. Moved and seconded. Do you want to speak to

[3:08:30] it? Thank you. Just to say that. I always appreciate

[3:08:33] the updates. And one of the things that I just

[3:08:37] wanted to say that I really appreciate. Top is the

[3:08:41] right item, but we do have part of this is.

[3:08:45] The moving forward. We're investigating what we're doing for inclusion

[3:08:49] and bringing that forward. For consideration, and that's something that

[3:08:53] came out of the idea committee, so they'll be thrilled

[3:08:57] to know that. This is going forward. And we know

[3:09:01] that when we've heard folks from the public come and

[3:09:04] talk to us, about how much these programs need to

[3:09:07] them. I think it's wonderful that staff will be investigating

[3:09:10] what else we can do to highlight those programs and

[3:09:13] see an extend. So the item has been moved and

[3:09:16] seconded. I don't see any other hands up. So I'll

[3:09:18] call a question then. All in favor? Opposed. Carrie. Thank

[3:09:23] you for that, staff and counsel. Next item is 4.2

[3:09:28] digital strategy for decision. And that is, I think we'll

[3:09:33] have Mr. Break. Provide an overview. Evening, mayor council. I'm

[3:09:40] just going to share my presentation here.

[3:09:50] You guys all see the screen? Yes, we can. Good

[3:09:56] evening, Mary and council. Thank you for the opportunity to

[3:09:59] present today. I'm pleased to share with you the city's

[3:10:01] digital strategy. It's an important step forward in modernizing how

[3:10:04] we serve our community and operate as an organization. This

[3:10:09] project began in late 2024 and was completed in early

[3:10:12] 2025. It was funded to the city's capital budget and

[3:10:15] as included in the corporate project plan under this sustainable

[3:10:18] core services and lead with good governance strategic priorities. RSM

[3:10:22] Canada was a partner selected to conduct the assessment and

[3:10:25] developed a digital. Strategy with city. Hawaii digital strategy technology

[3:10:34] is evolving quickly. AI and smart devices are changing how

[3:10:37] cities operate. Residents expect digital first services, just like they

[3:10:41] get from banks and other governments. We need to modernize

[3:10:44] to improve service, use resources wisely, and stay secure. This

[3:10:48] strategy is our roadmap to align. Technology with council's goals

[3:10:53] and prepare for the future. So RSM began by reviewing

[3:10:58] existing documentation to understand the city's current digital landscape. How

[3:11:02] systems are used where gaps exist and what's working well.

[3:11:08] This provided foundational understanding of the tools and processes in

[3:11:12] place today. To build a strategy that reflects real needs.

[3:11:16] We engage staff across departments through through ten workshops and

[3:11:20] four surveys. These sessions helped us gather valuable insights into

[3:11:24] day to day challenges, opportunities for improvement, and aspirations for

[3:11:29] the future. We review the 120 survey responses, held ten

[3:11:33] workshops, and reviewed eight key documents. From this RSM identified

[3:11:39] over 45 observations that shaped our understanding of the current

[3:11:43] state and informed the strategies direction. There were eight current

[3:11:48] state themes identified that highlight what the city's digital environment

[3:11:52] needs improvement these include gaps in data and reporting, disconnected

[3:11:57] systems, outdated tools, and limited resources. We also face challenges

[3:12:01] with governance, training and service delivery. These findings pointed to

[3:12:05] where we could. Focus our efforts moving forward. As we

[3:12:09] look forward. Proposed initiatives were grouped into four strategic themes.

[3:12:16] Developing workforce capabilities. We want to enhance our organizational efficiency

[3:12:20] by building a skilled and knowledgeable workforce to refocus expertise

[3:12:24] on high value activities and empower employees to support and

[3:12:28] drive strategic is initiatives, optimize is operations and govern. Governance.

[3:12:33] This is redefining, refining and standardizing is operations to align

[3:12:39] with strategic goals. Enhance service delivery quality and optimized resource

[3:12:45] management. Modernized technology infrastructure, transforming the city's is infrastructure to

[3:12:51] create a scalable, efficient, and resilient technology foundation that supports

[3:12:55] service delivery and data informed decision making and finally, elevating

[3:13:00] citizen experience enhancing. Our digital interaction. And engagement with citizens

[3:13:05] by upgrading digital platforms and deploying advanced citizen facing tools.

[3:13:11] The digital strategy includes 14 initiatives mapped to the four

[3:13:15] strategic themes. Examples are establishing a training program establishing is

[3:13:20] governance, and this is one of the initiatives we've done

[3:13:23] some work on. We've established a committee and are finalizing

[3:13:26] the terms. Designing a cloud strategy. We're nearing completion of

[3:13:32] this initiative as well and elevating. Citizen support. Details of

[3:13:36] each initiative are included in the agenda package. This slide

[3:13:40] shows how each digital initiative was assessed based on two

[3:13:43] dimensions, benefit to the city and complexity to implement. The

[3:13:47] goal is to help us prioritize effectively, focusing first on

[3:13:51] niches that offer the most value for the lease effort.

[3:13:54] On the top left, we have quick wins. These are

[3:13:56] high impact and low complexity. Projects that can be implemented

[3:14:01] quickly. And on the right, top right. We have major

[3:14:05] projects that are also high impact but require more time,

[3:14:08] resources and planning. This matrix supports decision strategic decision making,

[3:14:13] ensuring we invest the right initiatives at the right time.

[3:14:17] So we have here is a proposed 24 month roadmap.

[3:14:21] This roadmap provides a high level view of how the

[3:14:23] city could phase it in digital initiatives over the next

[3:14:26] two years. It's important to note this is an illustrative

[3:14:29] timeline, not a fixed schedule. It's meant to guide planning,

[3:14:33] not prescribe it. The roadmap helps us visualize how? Initiatives

[3:14:38] align with strategic priorities and when key decisions or investments

[3:14:41] may be needed. We sequence initiatives to balance quick wins

[3:14:45] with long term projects to require more planning and resources

[3:14:48] as we move forward, this timeline will evolve based on

[3:14:51] resources, interdependencies, and emerging priorities. Next steps. So we want

[3:14:59] to establish governance and oversight. Our first party is to

[3:15:02] finalize the governance structure. That will oversee the implementation of

[3:15:05] the strategy. This includes defining. Clearly defining roles, responsibilities and

[3:15:11] reporting mechanisms to ensure accountability. It also provides a framework

[3:15:15] for managing risk and making informed decisions as we move

[3:15:17] forward. Review and align on recommendations. We will conduct a

[3:15:23] thorough review of the 14 proposed initiatives. This step ensures

[3:15:28] that each initiative aligns with the city's strategic goals and

[3:15:31] operational needs, will engage department leads and staff to validate

[3:15:35] priorities and refine the roadmap where needed and finally. Align

[3:15:39] resources and funding, will assess the staffing budget and vendor

[3:15:43] support required to deliver these initiatives this includes identifying opportunities

[3:15:48] for phase implementation and the potential for any external funding

[3:15:52] will bring forward related funding requests through the annual budget

[3:15:55] process to support execution. Looking ahead. So our vision is

[3:16:01] simple but powerful. A digitally empowered, citizen. Focused port booty.

[3:16:05] This is about more than just technology. It's about how

[3:16:09] we can serve our community better. We're at a turning

[3:16:12] point. Technology is changing how cities operate and how people

[3:16:15] expect to interact with their local government. This strategy lays

[3:16:18] out a plan to not just keep up, but also

[3:16:21] lead with purpose. It's about being proactive, not reactive. This

[3:16:26] roadmap gives us a clear direction and helps us prioritize.

[3:16:31] Invest wisely and build a city that is more connected,

[3:16:34] more efficient and more resilient. This is our opportunity to

[3:16:37] move forward. Together. With the right focus and commitment, we

[3:16:40] can turn this strategy to a real, meaningful progress for

[3:16:43] our staff, our residents and our future. Thanks, mayor. Council,

[3:16:47] if you have any questions, I'm happy to take any.

[3:16:51] Thank you, Raymond. That was a very good overview of

[3:16:55] the. Proposed strategy. I'll put it out to council. I

[3:17:01] see. Councilor Knowles, how's her hand up. Thank you, chair.

[3:17:07] Thanks Miss Rahman, great report thanks for keeping it short

[3:17:10] I know this is a really long presentation and you

[3:17:12] could have talked for hours, and I'm sure you would

[3:17:13] like to. But I think we got the gist, so

[3:17:18] that's great. I wanted to ask you. A question that

[3:17:19] I've actually asked you before, but I've forgotten the answer

[3:17:22] and. That was. When was the last time we did

[3:17:25] a fulsome? Kind of audit of this department and where

[3:17:29] we are and what we need and where the gaps

[3:17:31] are, please. Through the chair. We have not conducted. An

[3:17:37] assessment like this in not my time with the city,

[3:17:39] and I've been here since. 2008. Wow. Okay. And if

[3:17:44] I recall correctly, this was on the books to happen

[3:17:47] sometime before Covid and then Covid interrupted that. Can you

[3:17:50] speak to that a bit? Correct? Yeah. It was slated

[3:17:54] to happen during Covid year and we delayed it. And

[3:17:59] then we waited till after. The council's strategic plan to

[3:18:03] get in place. And just between timing and everything, It

[3:18:07] took a little bit extra time, but we've got some

[3:18:09] priorities from council and from the city manager, so we

[3:18:13] wanted to make sure we got it completed this year.

[3:18:15] Right. Okay, so. This is overdue. I don't think there

[3:18:18] should be any doubt about that. I know other organizations.

[3:18:22] Private, public, not for profit. They do this on a

[3:18:25] regular basis. So better late than never, but yeah. I

[3:18:31] would think towards the top of our priority list, and

[3:18:33] I'm glad to see a lot of these projects on

[3:18:35] there? Some. I don't understand. They're way beyond my. Pay

[3:18:38] grade, so I look forward to kind of dealing with

[3:18:41] these one by one as they come. For during the

[3:18:43] budget process. I don't think many of us were surprised

[3:18:47] to see that there's some troubling gaps in our systems

[3:18:49] and architecture that need attention. The recommendations are significant. But,

[3:18:57] yeah, I guess I just want to ensure residents that

[3:18:59] none of these standalone project recommendations have been approved for

[3:19:02] spending yet, and they will come to council individually. During

[3:19:07] budgeting for consideration and we could ask for information at

[3:19:11] more time and I will be asking for more information,

[3:19:13] because a lot of the stuff I don't understand. It's

[3:19:16] clear, though, that some of these things should take place

[3:19:19] immediately. And I know your department is already working on

[3:19:22] that already, so I thank you for that. This is

[3:19:26] about Port Moody and the city remaining current secure, nimble,

[3:19:31] but. It's also about meaningful data integration and the customer

[3:19:35] service experience, which is a priority of this council. Yeah.

[3:19:40] We want to make sure Port Rudy's position professionally and

[3:19:43] aligned with our counterparts. And happy to support this. Thank

[3:19:47] you. Thank you, councilor. Sorry. Is there anybody else that

[3:19:52] has. Anything to add? The motion has not been moved.

[3:20:00] And the motion is to adopt as recommended. That's been

[3:20:04] moved and seconded. Any other questions or comments? Seeing none.

[3:20:06] All call the questions. All in favor? Opposed? Carried unanimously.

[3:20:11] Thank you, Raymond. Next item is. Item 4.3. Kyle center

[3:20:21] redevelopment project proposal. So we have a presentation being provided

[3:20:26] tonight. Who's going to be providing that. Who's the project

[3:20:30] manager for this? Ms. Pansense. Thank you.

[3:20:44] Kim, I believe. That Sandy was going to present on

[3:20:47] this. Mr. Look for her. She didn't expect us to

[3:20:52] get to the site in this quickly. Maybe. I'm just

[3:20:57] checking. We're just adding her to the panel. Okay, perfect.

[3:21:00] Thank you. Thank you. To the presentation.

[3:21:18] Let me share my screen. Great. Ms. Talentino, you have

[3:21:25] the floor. Thank you.

[3:21:44] Perfect. Are you guys able to see the screen? Yes,

[3:21:47] but. It's not in presentation mode yet. Here we go.

[3:21:52] Oh, great. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and council. I'm

[3:21:57] here to present the proposal of the cattle center redevelopment.

[3:22:02] Project. So I'm going to share a bit on the

[3:22:05] background leading up to why we're proposing this project, and

[3:22:08] then I'll go into some details about the project in

[3:22:10] terms of phasing. Sighting and phasing. And then I'll wrap

[3:22:14] up with some financial considerations. So cal century. Is an

[3:22:22] 11,000 square foot facility that was built in 1977. It's

[3:22:29] hosted a number of different groups over the years. With

[3:22:32] a focus on seniors activities. Currently, it still runs some

[3:22:36] programs and services, such as fitness, dance, general interest programs

[3:22:40] and seasonal events. It also offers rental space for a

[3:22:44] community functions. However, the facility is quickly approaching end of

[3:22:48] life. And what requires significant capital renewal to. Bring it

[3:22:54] back to fully functional. However, even. With the current design

[3:23:01] and layout, there are limitations to its expandability. In order

[3:23:05] to meet the growing community. Whose recreation needs and trends

[3:23:10] are also changing as well. So staff have been working

[3:23:14] on the retreation facility study project, and there was a

[3:23:18] public. Engagement component to it that took place last fall,

[3:23:23] and through the engagement we received some feedback. Specifically regarding

[3:23:27] Kyle center as well. Basically. With the respondents. Desiring some

[3:23:35] form of improvements to the building. So the population of

[3:23:39] Port Woody is expected to almost double by 2015. And.

[3:23:47] With the growing and changing recreation needs, it's apparent that.

[3:23:51] A new and bigger community center is required. And with

[3:23:55] the Moody center. Tod coming online. With all the high

[3:24:00] density developments, the Cal center site offers a great second

[3:24:04] hub. So in light of all that, Staff are proposing

[3:24:10] to redevelop the Cal center area, which is basically the

[3:24:15] area. Shown within the order here. There are three components

[3:24:20] to this or three main components. There's the new community

[3:24:24] center, which. Is going to be 30,000 sqft. So that's

[3:24:30] about almost three times as big as the existing cow

[3:24:34] center. There's the new and expanded Cow park, which would

[3:24:39] be situated on the three city lots. On east of

[3:24:42] Cal street and also a community center that would better

[3:24:46] integrate and connect to the nearby port Modi art Center,

[3:24:51] as well as the new and expanded cow park and

[3:24:54] basically. The whole space. The idea is also to locate

[3:24:59] a new community center as west as possible. While leaving

[3:25:04] space on the west end of. The site. For future

[3:25:09] potential affordable housing. But the project is proposed to take

[3:25:15] place in four phases, with the first phase being conceptual

[3:25:18] design. Of the whole project area, including the community center.

[3:25:25] The park and the plaza, followed by detailed design of

[3:25:29] the same space. Which could start as early as Q.

[3:25:33] 2026, followed by construction of the community center in Plaza

[3:25:38] starting in Q. 2027, followed by construction of the cow

[3:25:43] park starting in Q three 2027 this timeline is tentative

[3:25:50] right now, depending on outcomes. Of the conceptual design and

[3:25:54] also funding availability. In terms of the conceptual design. We

[3:26:01] will be doing surveys and geotechnical assessment to ensure that

[3:26:06] the site is viable for the proposed development. There will

[3:26:09] also be a public engagement that would take place in

[3:26:11] two phases. But phase one, focusing on function and programming

[3:26:16] or identification of the space needs for the community center.

[3:26:20] We will be doing targeted engagement with existing facility users,

[3:26:25] account center users such as Pomo Arts we also be

[3:26:29] reaching out to the broader public, including future users, regarding.

[3:26:33] Potential space needs requests. And phase two would be when

[3:26:38] we would share. The recommended conceptual design through renderings and

[3:26:43] also a physical model with the public just to get

[3:26:46] feedback to make sure that we are meeting. The community's

[3:26:50] expectations. So if council approves the project tonight, then we

[3:26:56] will be starting. The functional programming in phase one of

[3:27:01] the public engagement in q three, 2025. With the results

[3:27:06] feeding into the conceptual design and cost estimate, which will

[3:27:09] take place in q four 2025, followed by. Phase two

[3:27:16] of the engagement in q one, 2026. And then we'll

[3:27:20] bring. The final conceptual design and funding strategy to council

[3:27:25] for approval within the same quarter. I should also mention

[3:27:29] that during the conceptual design phase and through to the

[3:27:34] detailed design phase, Staff. Will be looking at options to

[3:27:39] relocate the existing programming and services being offered at Cal

[3:27:43] center. We aim to provide. As much heads up to

[3:27:48] the existing users. As possible to ensure a smooth transition.

[3:27:54] In terms of financial considerations, the conceptual design will require

[3:27:58] a budget of 515,000. Dollars to be funded from the

[3:28:05] community amenity contribution reserve and for the rest of the

[3:28:10] project. Including construction of the community center. Plaza and Cow

[3:28:15] park. A high level estimate is between 30 to 40

[3:28:20] million. Dollars to be funded. With city resource and debt

[3:28:27] financing. With the cost estimate. From the conceptual design phase

[3:28:32] will be able to refine the numbers a bit more.

[3:28:36] And also look into. The detailed split between city reserves

[3:28:41] and debt financing, and staff will also be looking for

[3:28:44] incentive opportunities as well as DCC and ACC opportunities. That's

[3:28:51] the end of my presentation. Thank you for that succinct

[3:28:56] presentation, Ms. Tolentino. I'm going to open it up to

[3:29:00] council for their comments at this time. Councilor Dillworth, you

[3:29:05] have the floor. Great. Thank you. I'm really excited about

[3:29:12] this, and I think staff got it right when they

[3:29:15] said this. Is a facility that is at end of

[3:29:17] life. It's 48 years old. And do you know what?

[3:29:21] I think it's time that a council make a strong,

[3:29:25] bold decision to evolve the 50 year old parking lot

[3:29:29] and a 50 year old building. And I think this

[3:29:31] is the right plan, it's the right time. It ties

[3:29:35] strongly. Into. Our park strategy. It ties into land acquisition

[3:29:42] strategy. It ties into our goals for infrastructure improvement. And

[3:29:48] I know we previously talked about spending a million dollars

[3:29:52] here, a million dollars there, just to fix it up.

[3:29:56] And I am encouraged by my colleagues commitment to look

[3:30:00] at leaving what can only be called as a legacy

[3:30:03] project in Moody center. This isn't just. Putting up a

[3:30:07] replacement building to replace Kyle center. This is tripling the

[3:30:11] amount of programmable space. This is acknowledging that we want

[3:30:16] affordable housing for seniors or otherwise, and we're making space

[3:30:20] there for it. We're creating an open plaza like this

[3:30:24] is going to be the place to go in. Moody

[3:30:28] center. Once it's done. Yes, there is cost to that.

[3:30:35] But you know what? This is great timing to start

[3:30:38] putting some of these costs into our budget. And adding

[3:30:41] to our new ACC and DCC program that I know

[3:30:45] staff are going to be. Bringing back in the near

[3:30:47] future. I understand that staff are working hard, so look

[3:30:52] at potential temporary relocations for existing users such as the

[3:30:57] Art center, such as the Rock and Gem Club, such

[3:31:00] as the Seniors, where they hold. Their luncheons. I just

[3:31:06] hope everybody can get around this and. I'm really looking

[3:31:09] forward to engagement. With current users and people who don't

[3:31:15] usually use that facility. But would if there is something

[3:31:20] there that attracted them or gave them reason to use

[3:31:23] it, I do have a question, though. Again. I can't

[3:31:27] believe this building is 48 years old. In the past.

[3:31:30] I know when we've looked at expanding facilities. We've always

[3:31:37] talked about. Oh, can we put another floor on top

[3:31:39] of the library? Oh. Can we add another floor here?

[3:31:44] And. It's never been feasible because we haven't looked at

[3:31:47] designing the buildings and constructing them from the get go

[3:31:50] with a future expansion. You know what? Assuming we can

[3:31:54] get another 50 years out of a new building, Will

[3:31:58] the design. Initial design work take into consideration. Potential adding

[3:32:03] on of another floor or two in 25 or 30

[3:32:07] years, and I don't. Know who's best able to answer

[3:32:10] that question. Ms. Talentino, do you know who would think

[3:32:13] best to answer that question? Through the chair. Chairs

[3:32:23] is here, but I'll give my first try. So. We

[3:32:29] could look at adding a third floor. And basically. Designing

[3:32:35] the foundation to it. But I guess the downside would

[3:32:38] be. If the building code changes in the next ten

[3:32:42] years or so. Then building up an additional floor. In

[3:32:50] later years may require more changes or modifications than we

[3:32:54] are expecting at this point. Thank you. I kind of

[3:32:59] expected that answer. I'll just close with saying I'm really

[3:33:03] excited to hear what the neighbors think. Over the last

[3:33:06] number of years, we've initiated pop up activities and actions

[3:33:10] that have attracted a large number of different user groups

[3:33:14] and families, and I can't wait to make some big.

[3:33:19] Bold changes down there that is going to really work

[3:33:22] for movie center. And leave a lot more opportunity than

[3:33:27] a 48 year old, 11,000 square foot building. So I'll

[3:33:31] move the recommendation. Okay, great. It's been seconded by many.

[3:33:36] Okay, thank you, councilor. We'll move on to Councilor Knowles.

[3:33:41] Thank you, mayor. I actually meant to speak first. Not

[3:33:44] that it matters, but I accidentally lowered my. Hand. Sorry.

[3:33:47] No. I'm laughing at myself, so I hope you all

[3:33:51] do, too. Okay, so first of all, thank you so

[3:33:54] much for the presentation, Sandy. I'm actually surprised how short

[3:33:57] it was, considering. How exciting and big I think this

[3:34:00] news is. I was expecting something. I don't know. Like

[3:34:02] confetti. Like confetti guns or something. This is huge. This

[3:34:06] is very exciting. So thank you for that. So. The

[3:34:12] comments that I'd like to make. Are. I think councilor

[3:34:17] Derworth has said a lot of them, this project is

[3:34:19] intended to meet. Our growing and changing community. And as

[3:34:23] identified in our strat plan or land management strategy, our

[3:34:25] Parkland strategy, and our cultural vision, as councilor Dilworth mentioned,

[3:34:29] right. This fits so many. Spaces that we've been trying

[3:34:34] to fill. So, as the report notes, many respondents to

[3:34:37] our recreation facilities, advocated for investment in a renewed cloud

[3:34:41] center. So I'm very proud. This council could finally announce

[3:34:45] that we were already working on this identified need, and

[3:34:49] I'm so happy that this council is finally getting Moody

[3:34:51] center the attention it deserves. And by that, I mean?

[3:34:54] In addition to a new Cal center, we've moved important

[3:34:57] initiatives specific to this neighborhood. Including but not limited to

[3:35:01] increased tree canopy. A town hall on expand. Expanding park

[3:35:04] land and moody center. The purchase of two more lots

[3:35:07] for parkland. Special study for the area south of St.

[3:35:10] Jones and improved emobility infrastructure. I'm really excited for Moody

[3:35:14] center. So let's be clear. This new proposed facility will

[3:35:20] replace the current crumbling 11,000 square foot facility with a

[3:35:25] 30,000. Square foot facility. It'll increase parking for the area

[3:35:29] as a whole. It'll enhance and expand our green spaces,

[3:35:32] and it's going to create. New cultural, new opportunities for

[3:35:35] cultural and artistic center in Port Modi. At least that's

[3:35:38] my vision, but I guess we'll see how it goes.

[3:35:40] I know staff is already working. On how we're going

[3:35:42] to relocate current. Programming during construction, so hopefully we'll have

[3:35:46] some good news to share on that soon. And, of

[3:35:48] course, the community. Will be able to contribute via robust

[3:35:52] engagement plan. As we proceed, we want to hear from

[3:35:55] everybody and particularly from Moody Center. Now the bad news.

[3:36:00] I know I and others on council, not everyone had

[3:36:02] hoped that we could share in this expense. With a

[3:36:04] developer who might also provide some housing options. But the

[3:36:08] economic reality is that this isn't currently feasible. We are

[3:36:11] hoping that in some point, at some point in the

[3:36:13] future, it will be. And we may be able to

[3:36:15] partner. Then I guess we'll see. It's just unfortunate that

[3:36:18] the state of our building industry is so dire. Due

[3:36:22] to increased costs at every level, but in my opinion,

[3:36:25] it's all the more important. That your local government steps

[3:36:27] up in times like this to get things done and

[3:36:30] deliver what its residents need. Lastly, I just wanted to

[3:36:34] quickly address the comments shared during public input. I truly

[3:36:37] do not believe that any reasonable. Person would agree that

[3:36:41] spending 2 million on a temporary patch for crumbling and

[3:36:43] inadequate building nearing end. Of life at end of life

[3:36:47] would have been a wise decision or investment by this

[3:36:50] council or. By the city not two years ago and

[3:36:53] certainly not today. So this building needs to be replaced.

[3:36:56] Period. So let's build it back, bigger and better. Thank

[3:37:00] you. Thank you, councilor. Next speaker is councilor Lubic.

[3:37:14] I'll be quick. I appreciate. All my. Confidence so far.

[3:37:24] This is, I think, a great news story, and I

[3:37:26] hope that everyone is really looking forward to taking part

[3:37:29] in the engagement and understanding what's going to be there

[3:37:33] and helping provide feedback. On that. I know our senior

[3:37:37] focus committee has been working for a long time on

[3:37:41] seniors needs. And on senior recreation needs. I'm sure they'll

[3:37:45] help. Wonderful input. And as we just heard, our idea

[3:37:48] committee. Is also thinking about inclusion in spaces, so they'll

[3:37:52] have wonderful ideas as well. So I think this is

[3:37:55] going to be? A great way for the community to

[3:37:58] come together. And really put our values into action. The

[3:38:05] population is growing. We know that. And this building really

[3:38:09] is at the end of life, and it has been

[3:38:11] looking very sad for quite a while now. And just

[3:38:16] patching. It's not the way forward, I don't think. It

[3:38:21] definitely needs to be expanded, and with that extension, there's

[3:38:24] opportunities to also expand. Kyle campus with more park space,

[3:38:28] with more staff, have been doing a wonderful job with

[3:38:30] the pop up perks. There may be opportunities to make

[3:38:33] some of those my personal perspectives, some of the pop

[3:38:35] up park. Elements of the people love permanent. See what

[3:38:39] happens, what people like. And I think we have a

[3:38:42] lot of opportunities to also look at. Providing what we've

[3:38:48] heard in some of the OCP engagements. That's my theme.

[3:38:51] For me. People have been saying that they want recreation

[3:38:54] facilities and they're concerned about that. I mean, this is

[3:38:57] how we go about. Doing it and making sure people

[3:39:01] have been. Also really excited that we will have the

[3:39:06] opportunity to potentially follow through with one of council's. Policies,

[3:39:11] which is to look at incorporating verbal closing. Into. Extension

[3:39:18] of public facilities. This is something that we've been looking

[3:39:19] for students for a long time. And I'll be honest,

[3:39:24] I'm not hoping that we partner with the developer. I'm

[3:39:26] hoping that BC housing or something like that so that

[3:39:29] we can. Have. Completely affordable housing to meet the needs

[3:39:34] of our ongoing community. And especially thermal vulnerable in our

[3:39:40] community. So I think this can be a win win

[3:39:42] all over. The place. And portion of the steps. Thank

[3:39:46] you. Thank you, councilor. Councilor Lobeki. You had your hand

[3:39:53] up. Are you not wanting to speak to this now?

[3:39:55] No, I am. I don't know how that happened. Okay,

[3:39:58] thanks. Sorry, I just make myself the notes here. So

[3:40:04] I just have a question through the staff. Regarding long

[3:40:08] term funding of this project because it mentions the CACs

[3:40:11] in terms of this phase. One kind of scoping initial

[3:40:14] design work, but the long term funding of the project.

[3:40:18] Is that based? On. Future development. Are we planning to

[3:40:23] pay for something like this? Based on the idea that

[3:40:26] we will in fact, be building significant future development or.

[3:40:31] Do we have? Because I'm asking this question. Because even

[3:40:34] if all development stopped next year, just so we have

[3:40:37] approved already. What we've seen built already, right? Like our

[3:40:41] population has gone up to 40,000. People. Now, we need

[3:40:44] the direct center, basically. Now. So, just wondering, the long

[3:40:49] term funding, if it's dependent on future, even additional development

[3:40:54] to pay for it. I think from my understanding that

[3:40:58] any future development would just augment, but. I'll go to

[3:41:02] Mr. Gansky or Ms. Talentino. To better explain. Either way,

[3:41:08] I think Mr. Gansky would be a better person to

[3:41:11] speak to this. Okay, thank you through the chair. Yeah.

[3:41:18] Currently the cac reserve. Wouldn't have the funds necessarily to

[3:41:23] complete. A project of this magnitude. But based on what

[3:41:29] we have in stream and with some forecasting, We're anticipating.

[3:41:37] That. Those funds would be available for a project such

[3:41:40] as this. Although it's ultimately going to come down to

[3:41:45] that final funding strategy that we bring back. To council

[3:41:48] once we know what our total costs are. And what

[3:41:52] options are available at that time for council to look

[3:41:55] at. Thank you for that. I mean, the idea of

[3:41:59] growth, paying for growth, of course, but also recognizing. We

[3:42:04] don't want to be dependent on a future that we

[3:42:06] don't know necessary. Will be true to build an amenity

[3:42:09] we need today. To kind of add to the issue

[3:42:12] of why we need it. So I look forward to.

[3:42:16] Conversation, which I know will come in the future in

[3:42:18] terms of looking at balanced options that can make sure

[3:42:21] that this gets built in funded. My next thought is

[3:42:27] this is a community center. And that means we need

[3:42:31] here, for the community. So that is going to be

[3:42:34] phase two. That's what I'm really looking for. Phase one.

[3:42:37] What we're doing is just this preliminary work and exercise

[3:42:41] around what this may or could look like. And then

[3:42:45] my understanding is that we're going to the public to

[3:42:47] hear from you about what you want your community center

[3:42:50] to look like. What program do you want? To see

[3:42:52] what spaces you want to see. What do you want

[3:42:54] to see on that site? What do you think of

[3:42:55] what we're saying. And I think that it's important to

[3:42:58] know that that's where we're headed and that's in my

[3:43:01] mind. The step that. I'm kind of. Waiting for, and

[3:43:07] then we can decide where to go from there. I

[3:43:11] heard mention interesting comments about, I guess, one or more

[3:43:15] counselors apparently wishing that there was developer involvement here. If

[3:43:22] you could express differences of opinion on this council. There

[3:43:24] you go. The public lands need to stay in public

[3:43:30] hands. I strongly believe that. I have always said that.

[3:43:33] And will continue to fight for that. I'm very pleased

[3:43:37] that that is what we're. Doing on this site. I

[3:43:40] think that's what the community would expect us to do.

[3:43:44] And that the only form of housing that should be

[3:43:45] on public lands if it were to be. Considered is

[3:43:49] affordable housing. So I'll leave my comments there. This is

[3:43:53] very early days on this. So. I think that future

[3:43:59] conversations around what this is going to look like, how

[3:44:01] are we going to pay for it or other options,

[3:44:03] even as this evolves, will come to be. And have

[3:44:08] free, good conversations at the table over several years. So

[3:44:12] look forward to. Moving forward is the very first step

[3:44:16] in this longer process. Thank you, councilor. Councilor Agtrap. Thank

[3:44:22] you. I haven't heard anyone say we were going to

[3:44:26] sell land or interested in selling land. I don't think

[3:44:30] anybody on this council is in favor of selling public

[3:44:32] land. I won't speak for Councilor Knowles, but I didn't

[3:44:38] hear her say that. I think it's important that. We

[3:44:42] are going to have to contract or have a relationship

[3:44:46] with somebody to build this for us. Because we certainly

[3:44:48] aren't. But I think it's also important to keep it

[3:44:50] in the context. Of how projects get built and what

[3:44:55] our needs are, and I'm really excited to see this

[3:44:58] project move forward. I hope that the federal and provincial

[3:45:03] governments will have grant opportunities when we're ready to go

[3:45:05] down that road. And I see in the report that

[3:45:09] it recommends or suggests that. 50%. Would be split between

[3:45:18] city reserves and debt financing. But there's also other funding

[3:45:22] strategies, as Mr. Gansky said, and that will become clear.

[3:45:26] When we get to that point, Just for further context,

[3:45:30] when the cloud center was I was born in the

[3:45:32] year the Kyle center. Was built. And poor Moody had

[3:45:37] a population of 11,000 people, and now we have a

[3:45:40] population of 34,000 people. And even when the civic complex,

[3:45:45] I think, was proposed, they found an old article. I

[3:45:47] think it was early proposed in 1993. I'm sitting in

[3:45:52] city hall right now. People weren't too sure about it.

[3:45:57] And now it's a hub of the community. It's well

[3:46:02] used. We know that. We need more space. I'm sure

[3:46:06] everyone has heard from residents. When are we going to

[3:46:09] expand this? And when? Are we going to have more

[3:46:11] programs of that? And I'm sure Ms. Pavey. Tomlinson hears

[3:46:14] that all the time. What are our programming needs? And

[3:46:18] having taken my kids. To the Kyle center at various

[3:46:22] times. It's done a good job for a community, but

[3:46:27] now is the time that we need. To expand it.

[3:46:29] I know a number of families in Moody center that

[3:46:32] would be super excited to have an amenity. Like we're,

[3:46:37] I think, envisioning, so I'm really excited that we're, headed

[3:46:40] that way. And look forward to the next steps in

[3:46:43] hearing from our community. Thank you, councilor. Yeah, I agree

[3:46:49] with everything that's been said. Excuse me. For the most

[3:46:53] part, this is a really important project. That will really

[3:46:58] for Moody Center. That will really transform that neighborhood for

[3:47:03] future generations. And I think that. We need to. Be

[3:47:08] really happy and proud of the fact that. We're moving

[3:47:11] this forward at this time. Moody, centered, deserves to have

[3:47:15] this new facility. They're taking on a lot of growth.

[3:47:19] And they're going exponentially. And so this is the type

[3:47:23] of thing that has to happen in a neighborhood like

[3:47:25] that? You're not going to throw a lipstick on a

[3:47:27] pig. And sort of just sort of slap things onto

[3:47:31] it and try to make it work for another. It's

[3:47:34] just not going to work. So. The neighborhood will be

[3:47:39] growing over the next ten to 20 years. And they

[3:47:42] deserve to have this new facility, and I'm really happy

[3:47:45] that we're moving this forward at this point, at this

[3:47:48] point in time. The type of benefits that we will

[3:47:52] receive. From. The development that's occurring from the development that's

[3:47:58] already occurred. Will, in part, pay for this new facility.

[3:48:06] And as we said earlier, if there is other development

[3:48:09] that's approved, those funds can then be allocated to this

[3:48:13] project as well, or a portion of them anyways, so.

[3:48:18] I'm really happy to support this tonight. I think that

[3:48:20] this is. I would love to have seen this happen

[3:48:23] last year, but I know that these things take time.

[3:48:27] And. I do want to also. Sort of just alert

[3:48:32] there. We have some important stakeholders. The fort moody arts

[3:48:37] center. As one that need to be really brought into

[3:48:41] this process at the outset, at the very beginning. We

[3:48:45] need to know exactly what it is. That they envision

[3:48:49] for their needs. Because. It's going to be in part,

[3:48:54] I guess, a shared site, and we want to make

[3:48:55] sure that we're incorporating. Their needs into this process right

[3:49:00] away. One of the things that I am, I think,

[3:49:03] councilor, LeBecki brought it up around the public engagement. That's

[3:49:08] one of the things that's one of the parts of

[3:49:10] this process that I'm really excited about. I really want

[3:49:14] to hear from the community about what they want to

[3:49:16] see. In that building. What kind of programming do they

[3:49:19] want? Do they envision? What kind of amenity do they

[3:49:22] want in that neighborhood? And this is not just for

[3:49:27] moody center residents. It's for the community at large. But

[3:49:30] of course, it being situated Moody center, I think that

[3:49:34] that neighborhood will. Have a great opportunity to provide input

[3:49:38] on this, and I'm really looking forward to that. Stage

[3:49:41] of this process. So that is all I'm going to

[3:49:45] say, other than I support this wholeheartedly. And. I will

[3:49:50] call the question that has been moved and seconded. All

[3:49:53] in favor? Opposed? Carried unanimously. Thanks, everybody. We'll now go

[3:50:00] to risen report. So this is referral of strategic Priority

[3:50:05] committee resolutions. Senator mover in a second moved and seconded.

[3:50:09] All in favor? Opposed? Carried. Which takes us back to

[3:50:16] our council standing committee, where we will then do one

[3:50:20] more. Rise and report where we are receiving the business

[3:50:25] of tonight. So can I see him move her in

[3:50:28] a seconder for that. Moved and seconded all. In favor?

[3:50:33] Opposed? Carried unanimously. Thanks, everybody. Great meeting. Great decisions. Looking

[3:50:38] forward to seeing you all next. Week.

Strategic Priorities Committee

Agenda

Transcript