[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.