[0:35] Good afternoon everyone. I'd like to call the meeting to order at 4:30 today

[0:38] and acknowledge that the District of Tofino operates within the territory

[0:41] that's locally at First Nation. And a notice to attendees that the

[0:45] meeting is being video recorded and will be published on the District of Tofino's

[0:48] YouTube channel. And notice to the virtual attendees to

[0:52] sign up for the public comment and question period using the Q&A function

[0:56] in Zoom. To register, participants are required to enter their full name,

[1:00] residential address, and the agenda item they wish to speak to.

[1:04] And I'll move from the chair that pursuing to section 15 of the District

[1:07] of Tofino meeting procedure bylaw number 1229 2016 as amended the June 9th, 2026

[1:13] Committee of the Whole meeting be held electronically via Zoom and live

[1:16] broadcasted on the District of Tofino's YouTube channel and that the facility

[1:20] provided for the public to watch and hear the meeting be located at the

[1:24] Clayoquot Sound Theatre, 380 Campbell Street in Tofino, BC.

[1:29] » Seconded. >> We we don't do

[1:31] » Thank you. Uh Counselor Sawyer,

[1:33] all those in favor? None opposed, motion carried.

[1:37] Uh I'll also move from the chair that the June 9th, 2026 Committee of the

[1:41] Whole agenda be adopted. Thank you, Mayor Law. Seconded. All

[1:45] those in favor? Seeing none opposed, motion carried. And I'll move from the

[1:50] chair that the minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting held March 3rd,

[1:53] 2026 be adopted. Thank you, Counselor Thomas. All those

[1:59] in favor? Seeing no opposed, motion carried.

[2:03] I'll look up to Miss Hepner. Do we have any public comment on agenda items

[2:07] today? >> Thank you, counselor Steer. No one has

[2:10] signed up on the public comment. I will now make an open call for comment.

[2:14] Those in the gallery who wish to speak, please raise your hand. If there's

[2:17] anyone attending online, we assume they would like to make a comment. You can do

[2:20] so now using the Q&A function. When you begin a comment, you will need

[2:24] to state your name, your address, and the agenda item you are speaking to. I

[2:28] will now do a call, calling once, calling twice,

[2:33] calling three times. There are no comments at this time, counselor Steer.

[2:36] » Thank you. So, there are no delegations today, so

[2:39] we do have a correspondence from Laura Landy and Chrissy Montgomery,

[2:43] co-founders of the Nova Surf Lifesaving Club, regarding a request for seasonal

[2:48] space for the Nova Surf Lifesaving Club van.

[2:52] I'll look to the committee to see if there's any comments regarding them.

[2:56] » Sure, I'll comment. Um I thought that this was um

[3:01] they have two asks here, and I thought it

[3:03] pretty reasonable. Um I didn't know if

[3:08] Uh so, the Where is the Where is it here? The first ask is to have a

[3:12] a permit, and then the second one was an appointed

[3:17] a designated parking space. And I was wondering if I didn't know if

[3:22] perhaps a a designated parking space could be like

[3:25] a time limit that when they're in use, it might

[3:30] work for them. So, it's not out of use for the rest of

[3:33] the community for the whole period of the day.

[3:39] » Any other comments from anybody?

[3:43] Anyone? >> Yeah, I think it's uh I think it's a

[3:44] reasonable request. I think it's really great

[3:47] » [clears throat] >> community

[3:48] society. So, I think it's supportive of

[3:53] doing something to to meet their request.

[3:56] » I'm sorry. >> Um yeah, I'm also in favor of the

[3:59] request and find it reasonable. I also find or feel that designated spot would

[4:04] help communicate the presence of the

[4:06] lifeguard.

[4:09] » So, Thomas, I did see your note. I think I think

[4:13] great. Maybe I'll I'll look quickly to staff in terms of the request itself. Um

[4:18] I'll be happy to maybe refer to staff to give us maybe some of the

[4:22] technical work that would have to be done to honor that request. If you feel

[4:24] there's general consensus that we'd like to move forward with that request.

[4:29] Any any comments? >> Yeah, I think that it's certainly

[4:32] something that that staff can work on. It sounds like council or the committee

[4:36] is supportive. So, I think the next step would be to refer your request to staff.

[4:41] Um and if there's any There's There's a couple checks and balances that we need

[4:44] to put in place if anything needs to be turned around.

[4:47] » No, it's not we just work on it.

[4:49] » How about So, a resolution to um to refer to staff.

[4:55] Anyone like to make that? >> Yeah.

[4:58] » Mayor Law, thank you. >> I'll move that the committee of the

[5:00] whole recommends to council uh that staff be

[5:06] requested to return to council with a recommendation

[5:11] regarding

[5:14] Eno Surf Lifesaving Club request. Parking.

[5:18] Does that make sense? >> Um we may not need to return to council.

[5:22] So, if we were able to remove that that part from from the motion, we could just

[5:27] refer the request to to staff to execute.

[5:30] » Yeah, but for staff to execute that council

[5:34] recommendation, it has to come to regular council.

[5:37] » It will as part of the the minutes of the

[5:40] So, then >> So,

[5:42] » Okay. It's okay. I think any we can certainly look at that.

[5:46] » Sure. Uh so, we've got the motion on the table. We have a seconder. Thank you,

[5:50] Councillor Sawyer. Call the question. All those in favor?

[5:54] Seeing none opposed, motion carried. Great. So, we can move further into the

[5:58] agenda today. We've got a wonderful agenda today. So, starting with 8.1, uh

[6:02] Mini Peaks Legacy Project, mini soccer pitch.

[6:05] Pitch, sorry. Verbal report from Community Services.

[6:09] Mr. Lax, good to see you. >> Hello.

[6:14] Thank you for having >> Mayor and Council, good evening.

[6:17] » Thank you for attending.

[6:27] » Yeah, so I'm here to present um an opportunity for our town to um there is

[6:34] a project that will be a legacy of the FIFA World Cup. And it's um they are

[6:39] working with the Province of British Columbia as well as Via Sport and the

[6:44] Vancouver Whitecaps to build 20 mini soccer pitches across the province.

[6:49] Um basically what they provide is an

[6:54] artificial turf, fiber fences and boards, and um

[6:59] and then programming support as well as coach and education training.

[7:03] And they look to create accessible spaces that um have some informal play.

[7:09] So, think about our basketball courts or our pickleball courts, anybody can go

[7:14] in there as well as support um uh youth amateur sport at our grass

[7:19] level. Uh the program timeline, so it has

[7:23] opened for expressions of interest. And they will be working with the

[7:28] communities um to um

[7:32] look at the the sites that are selected. Um and then it's just ongoing. There's

[7:37] no end to the um application time. It's just until they have awarded all 20

[7:42] million pitches. And then they have a very aggressive

[7:45] timeline to have at least two built by September 2026.

[7:50] Um and then we'll work through the the rest of the money.

[7:54] Um and they'll support programming for

[7:59] after launch for 3 years. Um

[8:03] so looking at potential locations for it, um

[8:07] one would be the Wickaninnish >> new school of blacktop. For those of you

[8:11] who've seen it, it's in somewhat disrepair. And so um it's also where the

[8:18] largest mass kids congregate on a daily basis. So

[8:21] uh and accessible um for our remote communities to walk up from the dock. So

[8:27] that that is one that definitely uh one location that we've looked at. And the

[8:33] purpose of today is to this um assess the feasibility of this project um for

[8:38] our community and determine whether we should

[8:41] uh put in an expression of interest as sort of like a a first phase. And then

[8:47] understand the opportunities that it provides for our recreation and our

[8:50] community services, and then the responsibility shared responsibilities

[8:54] and next steps for it. Um

[8:59] one of the uh

[9:03] for the communities that they will award, what they're looking for are

[9:07] recreation infrastructure gaps. Um I hope um mayor and council uh and our

[9:13] parks and rec master plan support that we are one of those communities in a

[9:18] very big way. We have very heavy pressure on our school fields,

[9:24] being one for both school use as well as for community use.

[9:28] Um we have just a one single gym that we have access to. And then um thank you

[9:35] for your support of the community service and recreation department

[9:39] because we have a growing youth sport participation because of it.

[9:44] Very we to see that and and hope to find good homes for that increase in sport

[9:50] participation. Um in terms of community benefits is

[9:55] that we will have more community This will add one more

[10:00] community hub for kids to play at and take some of the pressure off of

[10:05] the old and the gym and the community hall which um

[10:11] have scheduling [clears throat] demands on on them or or

[10:15] quality concern like when it rains, you know, 300 mm a month

[10:22] here during our soccer season it makes it hard to harder to play on the field.

[10:25] So, having this what this mini pitches is artificial turf so you can play on it

[10:31] year-round. Um it'll also allow for multi-sport use and we're looking we

[10:37] would look into with the turf what what are the prime

[10:42] candidates for how for which sports would be best fit onto

[10:47] the turf. Um and and to the playing service

[10:51] and really what they're looking for what it'll provide is is more active engaged

[10:57] youth. They'll have one more space to play at.

[11:04] So, what the mini pitch or mini peaks project provides so they

[11:10] um they sport project management. They do

[11:14] the design work with you for the design as well as the installation as well as

[11:19] other hardware such as goals and perimeter boards or fencing.

[11:26] But one of the things were that is really excited about this project is

[11:30] that they also since it's with the Whitecaps, they provide 3 years of coach

[11:36] training and education. And so, for our volunteers, um

[11:40] it would just mean a lot to in terms of their coaching path to be able to access

[11:47] Whitecaps have a great reputation within the

[11:50] Lower Mainland community of of both the player and coach development. And for us

[11:56] to be able to access that as a remote community would would be huge. It

[12:00] really, internally, one of our goals is having greater continuity of of

[12:05] knowledge and support for our volunteer coaches. And And so, that aspect of it

[12:11] is is shouldn't be overlooked, I'd say. Um what the program does not cover is

[12:18] the site prep for um um

[12:21] for the surface. And then, the long-term maintenance piece, as well as the

[12:27] operational costs for it.

[12:37] Um so, the next steps is um with your support is is submitting an expression

[12:42] of interest. Then, uh our department will have to develop a project sheet.

[12:48] And then, uh also do have further discussion with

[12:53] the Mini Peaks uh technical team. So, they're just onboarding their technical

[12:58] staff. It's come together very quickly for them. And so, some of the the

[13:02] questions that we would be proposing would just be answered be able to be

[13:07] answered in the couple of weeks. So, um

[13:12] So, our recommendation is that the community as a whole recommend that

[13:16] council support our expression of interest for the Mini Peaks project. And

[13:20] that should the expression of interest be successful, that staff return to

[13:25] council at a future meeting with options for

[13:28] final consideration.

[13:34] » I think is this your first time presenting?

[13:36] » It is it is as staff. Yes. >> Thank you.

[13:39] Great. Looking to the committee. Counselor sorry. Then Counselor

[13:43] Anderson, Counselor Thomas. >> I just have a question to the chair

[13:48] regarding the potential other sports that could

[13:51] make use of that space. I know that currently the informal groups, ball

[13:56] hockey group enjoy that space and while it is

[14:00] informal, I wouldn't want to take it away from them if they didn't

[14:04] have any other options. Is that artificial turf conducive to that?

[14:09] » So that is that will be one of the questions for that technical team. I do

[14:15] see two things. One, I do see field hockey

[14:18] being played on turf. I'm not sure what the difference would be between

[14:22] the field hockey and and sticks. Right now

[14:27] anecdotally from we have been hosting ball hockey at the community hall and

[14:33] they choose to play inside even in good weather right now instead of playing at

[14:38] the blacktop. I would have um So in in terms of we've talked about

[14:45] that as staff, you know, for the saltwater classic that that is a space.

[14:50] Um but I I would leave it until we spoke to the

[14:54] technical team to be able to answer that.

[14:57] » Okay, thank you. >> Counselor Anderson, Counselor Thomas and

[15:01] then Counselor Swan. >> My question to the chair is um

[15:06] what sort of surface are they looking for? I'm

[15:09] wondering how much site prep is necessary.

[15:12] If the blacktop is a good surface to work with or it has

[15:17] to be removed. >> So

[15:20] um we're not sure in terms of

[15:25] in in speaking to some people like we'd have to there'd have to be I think

[15:30] a geotech analysis to figure out uh what would be needed on top but

[15:36] um or just set the the site appropriately.

[15:40] Um so that isn't that that isn't answer we'd have to

[15:46] return turn with.

[15:50] » Um I think on the surface I'm kind of

[15:54] supportive because I think with um the controversy and the cost related to FIFA

[15:58] we should try to grab onto any benefits we can get from such a large event

[16:01] coming to the province. Uh similar questions already been asked and also

[16:05] sorry I asked about what happens to the sports that get neglected from there and

[16:09] then Councillor Anderson brought up um the potential for preparing the site. So

[16:14] I was wondering where the maybe that's not a question for you but for other

[16:19] staff but where the cost would how we would pay for that for preparing

[16:23] the site like where that would come from from the budget and then I was also

[16:26] wondering about the ongoing maintenance that's required for AstroTurf. Like

[16:29] what's the lifespan going to look at for that? Um

[16:32] cuz other infrastructure I think we're pretty familiar with but knowing if we

[16:36] need to replace the AstroTurf in three years or five years or if it should last

[16:40] the 10 um would be useful information. >> Um

[16:45] should I refer that to you in terms of the possible site prep?

[16:50] » Yes Mr. Um we're understanding that likely we're moving a block off and

[16:55] we're rebuilding that whole section. What that costs and how we pay for it

[16:58] would be the subject of the project sheet. So if there's an expression of

[17:02] interest we'll get us in the a foot in the door to say this might be a good

[17:04] site and then once we once we know if we're approved or not then we would come

[17:08] back to council and say it looks like the site prep's going to cost this.

[17:13] Here's where we think our funding is. Is Is something else we're also in support

[17:16] of? So is what I just certainly think then. I think

[17:19] um and think about the long-term uh tell what what our needs will be over the

[17:23] 10-year period. I know that's something that Mr. Berman and his team have

[17:26] already started to put their brains our minds to. But again, that would be

[17:29] something that we'd bring back. So, let's assume that for that opportunity.

[17:33] The the EOI doesn't commit us to anything. It just says that that we're

[17:36] interested, basically.

[17:40] Councilor Sloan? >> Mhm.

[17:42] » And then also that's right, and then Mayor Wood.

[17:45] » Um I think that this is a great idea and

[17:50] um I'll I'll be supportive of it. And my

[17:53] question would be like as going forward if um

[17:55] there be any consideration of putting some coverage on it so we could extend

[17:59] the usage? >> Yeah, so I think um

[18:03] that would be one of one of the considerations, but

[18:07] at the um sort of high level that we're in

[18:10] right now, um those details um but

[18:16] in the Parks and Rec Master Plan, albeit it is a draft, um you know,

[18:21] covered space has been set up and spoken about as priority, so

[18:26] I think it would be important to look at as a consideration, for sure.

[18:32] » I think it's a great idea. I wish you would have applied for it. I think a lot

[18:35] of the questions we just heard from council are a little presumptive,

[18:38] assuming we get the thing. So,

[18:42] if we get the grant and then we can talk about

[18:45] it once we get it.

[18:48] » I concur. I think it's a great opportunity. I think one of the things

[18:50] that makes that space less than useful right now is it's is the surface.

[18:56] It's got, you know, the blacktop isn't great and it's

[19:01] it's not really great. It's not flat. So, I think if we fix that and get a

[19:04] grant to do it, I think the parking funds are sufficient to to carry

[19:08] anything that goes over, and I think it'll

[19:11] it'll be multi-use. We did have a a movable ice rink here

[19:15] several years ago that was quite popular going to flood spot.

[19:20] There are you know, mobile things that could go in there for recreation. I'm

[19:23] sure you could dream up. So I think it's a great idea.

[19:28] » Um maybe if we could get the recommendation back up onto the board. I

[19:32] think there seems to be a general consensus but

[19:36] we'd like to go at this thing. Get that back up there while

[19:41] or any members >> [clears throat]

[19:43] » like to volunteer to read the recommendation.

[19:52] » I have one more quick question. >> Sure. Go ahead.

[19:55] » Um and

[19:57] when I first saw this, I thought Bert Mary Park might be another choice.

[20:03] And we don't know if that was eliminated in staff

[20:06] discussions or not. But if

[20:10] if this site turns out to not be suitable, it would be good to um

[20:16] that's why we got to ask him about

[20:30] » Through the chair to Council Anderson, we have thought about Satchel possibly

[20:35] and Bert Mary. From what I understand at these early stages, part of the interest

[20:40] from Thunder has been our partnership with the school and the benefit to the

[20:46] the school kids and the access there. So if something

[20:49] that seemed to be what has to this point what we know now that that's what sort

[20:53] of grabs their interest is that partnership. Peace. We don't have that

[20:56] same thing at Bert Mary. I do agree that Bert Mary is in need of some programming

[21:00] and you know, possibly a redo of Satchel. So we'll definitely keep that

[21:04] in the back of our mind if something changes.

[21:07] » It It does bring up a point there. I'm just curious if being on SD70

[21:13] property it would retain our asset or how how would that

[21:18] I know we'll probably get that information what's later on but it is on

[21:22] SD70 property so whose asset would it be?

[21:25] » Should the chair to Councillor Steer

[21:28] you want to share the share? >> I think that's TBD like we we'd have to

[21:32] work through that process. Um likely being expansion over MOE projects

[21:37] and and then agreement about who's responsible for what exactly.

[21:42] I think at this point we're looking at our perspective but SD70

[21:47] sounds like they're interested in it they just may not have the funds to do

[21:50] it. We had done together.

[21:55] » Any Councillor would like to move it? >> Yeah, I'll move it.

[21:57] » No, I'll move it. >> Go ahead.

[21:57] » I'll move it to the end. I move that the Committee of the Whole

[22:01] recommend that Council support the expression of interest for the Mini

[22:04] Peaks project and that should the EOI be successful staff return to

[22:09] Council for at a future meeting with options for

[22:12] final consideration. >> Seconded by Councillor Quick Master. All

[22:15] those in favor signified opposed and motion carried.

[22:19] » Thank you very much. >> Next up on the agenda we have multi-use

[22:24] path >> safety improvements and another verbal

[22:26] report from Community and Protective Services.

[22:34] » I got to take behind the scenes here. >> [laughter]

[22:38] » Uh good evening Committee of the Whole. Uh Dean Collard Bylaw Supervisor Planner

[22:42] 1 for the District of Squamish. Um I'm here tonight to provide a brief

[22:46] update for the community regarding multi-use path safety grant that was

[22:50] recently applied and received for by the District of Squamish.

[22:57] Um so yeah, today's agenda today we'll go over the overview of the multi-use

[23:01] path, concerns raised by the community around safety, a grant opportunity

[23:05] received by the district, plan to implement those safety measures

[23:10] regarding the pilot program, and finally update community engagement

[23:14] opportunities.

[23:17] So, as you're all familiar with multi-use path, the

[23:21] multi-use path or MAP, also known as, is a 8.8 km

[23:27] linear active transportation trail that connects downtown Tofino with several

[23:30] beaches and neighborhoods on the Esowista Peninsula.

[23:34] And the MAP represents the combination of more than 30 years of planning and

[23:38] hundreds of hours of fundraising by volunteers. Over the past decade, the

[23:43] MAP has received significant investments through grants

[23:47] and the province's resort by initiative that has funded surface improvements,

[23:53] widening, and extension branches to Pacific Rim National Park Reserve and to

[23:57] Ucluelet. In actualizing the district's

[24:00] multi-modal transportation plan and cycling network plan, the MAP has become

[24:04] Tofino's one of Tofino's most popular and widely used civic pieces of

[24:08] infrastructure. With this, user traffic has

[24:13] significantly increased over this period of time and serves a diverse set of user

[24:17] groups including local residents, seniors, youth, and visitors, each with

[24:21] their own diverse set of mobility behaviors.

[24:26] We're also seeing a wide range of uses on the MAP, each with their own movement

[24:30] habits including dog walking, e-biking, e-scootering, commuter cycling,

[24:36] skateboarding, wheelchair use, walkers for breath, and general

[24:41] recreation use. This traffic often peaks in higher

[24:44] visitation windows, particularly in summer.

[24:48] And over recent years, the district has

[24:50] received feedback pertaining to safety concerns

[24:53] from several different sources including local residents, the RCMP, Island Health

[24:58] staff at the Tofino General Hospital, Tourism Tofino, and the Tofino Chamber

[25:03] of Commerce, amongst other community stakeholders.

[25:09] So, the Vision Zero Grant. So, following this feedback, staff collaborated with

[25:13] Island Health to identify an appropriate grant stream to respond to these

[25:17] community concerns. And in British Columbia, the Vision Zero

[25:21] in Road Safety Grant program was created in 2021 from the joint partnership of

[25:26] the government of BC, the BC Injury Research and Prevention

[25:30] Unit, Unit, the First Nations Health Authority, and five other local health

[25:35] authorities, including Island Health. The grant program provides funding to

[25:39] British Columbians who are seeking to create safer roads and spaces for their

[25:43] communities. A Vision Zero approach recognizes that people make mistakes,

[25:49] and sometimes these mistakes can result in road crashes and injuries. However,

[25:53] sometimes these mistakes However, governments, health

[25:57] professionals, and road designers, and road users can work together to

[26:01] implement proactive measures that minimize the severity of these crashes.

[26:06] Stream number one was selected by staff to seek funding for the design and

[26:10] installation of low-cost transportation infrastructure that improves the safety

[26:15] of vulnerable users. And in applying for this grant, staff

[26:19] referenced several policy guidelines to fit community concerns in identifying

[26:24] safety enhancements. Staff reviewed the Tofino's e-bike or e-mobility device

[26:29] policy, Tofino's multimodal transportation plan, Tofino's wayfinding

[26:34] sign plan, and the British Columbia Active

[26:38] Transportation Design Guide for safety mitigation measures.

[26:43] So, the grant application submitted by staff focused primarily on road user

[26:47] education, signage, and surface painting to take a proactive communications

[26:52] approach and it's intended to reach a diverse set

[26:56] of user groups and mobility devices. Staff applied for the Vision Zero grant

[27:02] stream number one in fall 2025 and was successful in their application

[27:06] receiving $70,000 in the spring of 2026.

[27:20] Fine.

[27:23] Yeah, here we go. About the safety measures. Perfect. Thank you.

[27:26] Uh the funds received from the Vision Zero grant are intended to be focused on

[27:30] several incremental safety enhancements primarily around messaging and signage.

[27:34] These measures target a high use section of the MUP and are planned to be

[27:38] introduced this summer as a pilot program to gather feedback and guide a

[27:42] broader active transportation safety strategy.

[27:46] Reviewing community feedback against local and provincial policy documents

[27:50] that I just mentioned, staff will work with Allen Health to develop uh the

[27:54] following safety precautions including larger and clearer simply worded signage

[27:58] alongside the MUP that will replace the existing signage, surface messaging

[28:03] painted on the asphalt pathway, slower speed zones in high traffic and limited

[28:09] sightline areas, keep right signs and ring bell to pass

[28:13] signs, consultation with bike, e-bike, and

[28:16] scooter rental companies to increase education,

[28:20] printed brochures and messaging for tourism to give out to MUP and

[28:23] businesses to give out to MUP users, on-site MUP education, and a feedback

[28:28] gathering mechanism.

[28:33] There we go. Timeline. So, you'll see here a section of the MUP

[28:37] in blue on the map up getting in the village for extending out to Tunnels and

[28:42] North Trestle and Beaches and then out to the National Park Reserve.

[28:46] The yellow section here in the middle is proposed to be the slower speed zone for

[28:52] for the map north of Sharp Road where most of the pilot program is primarily

[28:57] focused on. And stuff we're planning to implement

[29:00] the pilot program throughout this summer beginning with a print campaign offering

[29:04] user education to rental businesses and tourists in Tofino.

[29:08] Onsite education is also planned by staff offer handouts and user education.

[29:13] Um implement the implement of signage is planned for July and sort of it's

[29:17] painting for later afterwards. Uh following collection of feedback from

[29:22] user groups, the community and and staff will then return to council with their

[29:26] findings.

[29:30] Final communications and engagement. So throughout the pilot program staff are

[29:33] planning on publishing a Tofino survey. Staff will also engage with rental

[29:37] businesses and the Tofino Chamber of Commerce.

[29:40] Uh and then staff will return to council uh and continue gathering feedback to

[29:44] the following follow up their strategy on them.

[29:48] And with that I conclude my update for council.

[29:51] For your time. And happy to answer any other questions. No formal

[29:55] recommendation recommendation um seeking this council time. Just

[29:59] just an update but happy to take this.

[30:06] » Can you tell me what a speed zone is? Is it just a matter of putting a sign up

[30:09] saying slow slow down? >> Yeah, essentially. So so the provincial

[30:13] recommendation on speeds is 32 km/h and that's in our e-mobility device policy.

[30:19] So that's multi-use path wide. But we're seeing that higher traffic area kind of

[30:25] north of Sharp Road. Our intention is to designate that as the slower speed zone.

[30:31] So we're intending to to increase signage around that area.

[30:36] Enforcement can be can be tricky but we're choosing to take corrective

[30:40] enforcement uh and and use signage communication to to help mitigate that

[30:45] use.

[30:55] » Thank you. >> Uh Council Member

[30:57] » Uh just one one comment we have with that um signage.

[31:05] Like uh for a cyclist myself, I

[31:09] it's kind of out of out of your view range when you're turning. The

[31:13] » [clears throat] >> bike path are a little bit I don't know.

[31:16] I I think the more effective uh

[31:20] messaging would be right on the surface. And free standing signs,

[31:26] they start to get pretty numerous. I would

[31:30] and it the more you have, the less you

[31:33] really see them. Because they So anyways, that's just a

[31:37] just comment from being a cyclist that and

[31:41] the free standing signs aren't really well

[31:45] observed or or easy to see sometimes when you're

[31:49] cycling. >> Agreed. Yeah, thank you for the

[31:52] question, uh Mr. Henderson. Um yeah, the the pilot program implements both kind

[31:57] of like a surface painting pilot program where we'll paint actually on the map

[32:02] with communication and signage there and then also signage, typical signage, but

[32:06] larger and um uh more eye-catching.

[32:14] » So, uh you're someone who's hasn't used technology much, but what's the value in

[32:18] in a print uh campaign? And And I see that it it's launching in June and I And

[32:23] I know it's a pilot program, so maybe you will then evaluate the value of the

[32:27] print program, but what what is the the print campaign?

[32:31] » Good question. Thank you for the question. Um so, we're intending to kind

[32:34] of create some messaging on a printed format to hand out to e-bike rental

[32:38] businesses so that they can use that in kind of their orientation walk-through

[32:42] when a customer rents a a bike. Um and then also for staff to hand out on the

[32:48] mop um if there's some some compliance issues or kind of education issues. Um

[32:54] something that uh a visitor or local resident can can take home and read and

[32:59] also um follow up with our feedback mechanism through Talk Tofino.

[33:03] Thank you.

[33:07] » Seeing nothing else from the floor. >> Thank you, Mr. Recchia. Appreciate it

[33:10] once again. >> [clears throat]

[33:13] » So, moving on, we now have traffic and parking regulation bylaw

[33:19] amendments by Mr. Purton coming up.

[33:38] » Good morning, Mayor and Council and the Committee of the Whole.

[33:42] Today, I'll provide an overview of proposed amendments that were

[33:47] presented in my report to Council to the District of Tofino traffic and parking

[33:53] um regulation bylaw along with related updates to supporting

[33:57] bylaws.

[34:04] Beach pay parking was introduced in 2021 and downtown parking pay parking

[34:10] followed in 2023. Since then, there have been a few

[34:14] amendments updating fees. Um however, all fees will cease to have any

[34:19] increases post 2026. In January 2026, staff verbally

[34:25] discussed uh potential bylaw amendments with Council.

[34:29] Uh the committee subsequently directed staff to return with a detailed report

[34:34] to allow for more time to review implications and provide informed

[34:39] feedback and direction. Those discussions raised questions about

[34:43] resident downtown resident passes, commercial

[34:47] passes, business impacts, and whether the current bylaw language and fee

[34:51] schedules are as clear as they should be.

[34:55] As staff worked through the 2026 rule out, it also became clear that there was

[35:01] opportunities to simplify some of the rules and optimize the

[35:05] public-facing information.

[35:11] One area staff are recommending changes to is the commercial vehicle pass

[35:16] system. Right now, the traffic bylaw refers to a

[35:19] downtown-only commercial pass and a beach-only pass, each at $120.

[35:25] While the fees and charges bylaw lists the same fee as applying to both pay

[35:28] parking areas. Staff are proposing that all pay parking

[35:32] fees be consolidated into the fees and charges bylaw, so there's one clear and

[35:37] authoritative source for the fee schedules.

[35:40] Staff are also proposing that the commercial vehicle pass apply

[35:44] consistently across both areas, similar to how it's listed in the fees and

[35:48] charges bylaw, currently, with clear wording on what the pass

[35:52] allows and where restrictions would remain, such as long-term or overnight

[35:55] parking in certain locations.

[36:01] Another [clears throat] area for committee consideration is the downtown

[36:05] resident parking pass. Um as council could recall, a recent uh

[36:12] in 2024 draft parking traffic and parking control regulation bylaw

[36:16] amendment introduced a phased reduction in the number of permits allowed per

[36:20] unit, housing residential unit or the housing unit.

[36:24] The question staff has is whether the committee would like staff to continue

[36:28] with the 2024 model where the first permit is free and the second permit is

[36:33] $150 or the 2025 model where each permit is

[36:38] $150 to a maximum of two permits per unit.

[36:43] In either case, staff are proposing clearer bylaw language similar to the

[36:47] commercial passes on how these permits can be used and to which blocks they

[36:53] apply to.

[37:02] At the January 2026 Committee of the Whole meeting, staff were asked to take

[37:07] a closer look at the hourly rates options that were presented in light of

[37:12] current economic pressures. That analysis included a benchmark

[37:17] review of places such as Jasper, Whistler, and Parks Canada locations

[37:22] along with local parking data which continues to show that usage is

[37:26] primarily visitors based and the and and long and long duration parking remains

[37:32] limited. Based on that review, staff do recommend

[37:37] a fixed 3-year schedule that holds the current rate throughout 2027

[37:43] and introduces moderate increases in 2008 28 and 2029.

[37:49] In staff's view, this provides stability while supporting sustainable program

[37:54] revenue over time. The alternative approach would be a

[37:59] CPI-based model. While this model would be predictable,

[38:03] it would mean revenue growth follows inflation

[38:07] rather than actual costs and pressures associated with operating the paid

[38:11] parking program in the long term. Uh the revenue it generated under both

[38:16] options and subsequent incomes is is shared within the report that community

[38:21] impacts.

[38:30] » [clears throat] >> Staff are also recommending that the

[38:32] downtown pay parking start date shift to April 1st to reflect early spring

[38:37] visitor demand that we do see. And more broadly, one of the

[38:42] housekeeping items that I previously mentioned in the commercial pass slide

[38:47] is to reduce duplication risk across bylaw framework by placing all fees in

[38:52] the fees and charges bylaw, keeping the regulatory provisions in the

[38:56] traffic bylaw, and locating offenses only in the

[39:01] municipal ticketing and notice adjudication bylaws.

[39:05] Uh the next step, and subject to committee direction, would be for staff

[39:09] to prepare the necessary bylaw amendments and bring them forward for

[39:13] council consideration before the 2027 pay parking

[39:17] season commences. Uh then with that, I'll leave the

[39:21] recommendation on the screen and open up the floor to questions and discussion.

[39:28] » Thank you, uh Mr. Kirkland. I appreciate it.

[39:31] Presentation once again. I have a feeling there's going to be a few

[39:33] questions and comments. I'll look to the committee

[39:38] to see.

[39:42] No, go ahead with this with whatever you

[39:44] would like in this department. >> Um

[39:46] Um I was going to say that I'm in support of the schedule option one over

[39:52] option two. Um knowing that option one kept the

[39:57] rate steady for residents Frank Island and all those things, and

[40:02] the increases are just falling on the visitor usage. And I think having a

[40:07] more dependable model and clearly indicated that option two with the CPI

[40:12] wasn't going to meet our needs. Um for the over the downtown residential

[40:18] permit, um, I would be good with either the three first permit paying for the

[40:24] second one or either way adding the second permit back

[40:28] on. I think we heard some people that, um,

[40:31] not having that second permit was, um,

[40:34] detrimental to some people's lifestyles. And then what was the other

[40:39] one? Yeah. Anyway, overall I thought it was

[40:42] great. Um, I appreciate cleaning up, um, the things that were confusing for the

[40:47] public and getting things in

[40:52] » Thanks. Councillor Sawyer. >> Uh, thank you through the chair. I'm

[40:56] also in favor of the 2024 parking permit model for downtown

[41:02] residents, um, given that we're also eventually going to see increased

[41:07] density in that area. Um,

[41:09] it makes sense that more people will be needing to park on the street.

[41:17] » Different conversation brings us into uh, so the there was the option of um,

[41:22] the 2024 model and the 2025. So >> 2024 was one free permit and then one

[41:28] permit at 150. Yes. >> Yes.

[41:30] » Yes. >> Thank you.

[41:33] First moment. >> Um,

[41:36] yeah, I like the it seems to make sense to consolidate

[41:41] the, um, downtown rates into the into the fees and parking bylaw. Um,

[41:46] I'll go a little bit against the grain and I would like to see two permits per

[41:51] per household, but I still would like to incentivize people to park on their own

[41:55] property. And you can I think a

[41:58] large parking permit is not unreasonable for a parking spot. Um,

[42:04] uh, and I like the three model recommended

[42:08] by staff.

[42:12] Uh, what was the option one again?

[42:16] And I think that's all. Oh.

[42:21] Oh, it doesn't matter for the expansion of the dates.

[42:25] Um And I I wasn't really in favor of

[42:28] expanding the dates of the pay parking because I felt that

[42:33] it might put pressure on the downtown businesses because we don't people who

[42:37] live out of town or the visitors who are visiting out of town don't have the

[42:41] option to bike into town or they have less of an option because of the

[42:45] weather. So, I didn't feel comfortable with that.

[42:49] Um I also have concerns about that because

[42:52] um I know my family sometimes bikes into

[42:55] work and it's really difficult to bike to work in

[42:59] April when the weather can be so bad. So, I wasn't I wasn't in favor of

[43:02] expanding that.

[43:09] » Fair enough. >> Yeah, I like uh I like option one.

[43:14] Uh so, I can compare it with everybody and I'm

[43:19] torn on the downtown resident passes. I'm going to

[43:23] be neutral, so I'll see. Let's see what uh

[43:30] » Councillor did you have a >> Yeah, I like option one. I am

[43:35] quite happy 2024

[43:40] will fulfill the permits. The

[43:43] first permit is zero and second is 150. I'm in favor of increasing parking April

[43:50] 1.

[43:56] » Councillor did you >> Um also option one

[44:02] is my preference. Um

[44:06] I

[44:09] I haven't really made up my mind. Two options of paying separately or sticking

[44:16] with the 2024 model. I I think I think I think if we stick

[44:20] with the 2024 model the fee should be maybe

[44:26] 150 should I see it does go up a little bit

[44:32] and it's not significant. So maybe it could be 175 or 200 with the

[44:38] first option the first parking spot. Brief. Um

[44:44] I we need some incentive to get people to build their own parking.

[44:49] Um because

[44:53] parking whatever public buying is expensive.

[44:57] This is expensive and it's privately obtained. So

[45:01] Um there's

[45:05] I'm assuming these permits though permit the vehicle to park

[45:11] um anywhere. And they don't get a designated spot.

[45:16] Um because I think some people

[45:19] » for the >> start to sort of claim a spot for them.

[45:23] And I'm really against that. Should be all spots should be open to

[45:28] everyone. Including

[45:32] Yeah. >> Through the chair, I can offer some

[45:35] information if that is a question. Um the through the the the amendments that

[45:42] we're proposing would contain the spot to the resident's block. And right now

[45:48] how it reads would be the resident's street. So it does somewhat contain that

[45:52] a little bit more um and answer the question too, it it doesn't provide a

[45:57] designated parking spot for folks within their block.

[46:02] » There should be some turnover in all spots, and so it's all very doable.

[46:07] Very affordable.

[46:16] » Go ahead. >> Um I think we've gone through everybody,

[46:20] so I'll uh and

[46:22] uh just take a quick summary. Seems uh option one in terms of the fixed

[46:27] schedule uh seems to be the consensus of of the committee.

[46:30] Um and there's uh I I'd say somewhat split, but uh

[46:35] certainly uh the two permanent sites um in the residential parking permit area

[46:42] um with uh questions around possibly increasing I think the 2024 model, the

[46:47] first one free, the second one um to to have a fee associated with it, and

[46:53] there was uh Councillor Anderson had recommended and and I and I would

[46:57] support uh looking for the reasons I just said uh we want to incentivize

[47:00] people uh to be you know, one free spot, that's great, and then to to have a

[47:04] second there. Um and then public property isn't cheap, so uh I I would

[47:09] certainly look to increasing that that permit fee for the second one. Um

[47:15] 150 is a great deal to have a second uh space available to you, so

[47:19] uh certainly I would support that. Um in terms of the start date, we heard

[47:25] from Councillor Sloman with some concerns around there, um and then

[47:28] Councillor McMaster I I would be in support of starting in

[47:32] April 1st as well. I think um where um you know, the potential revenue uh gains

[47:37] from that um I think are important. My one concern

[47:41] and and question that I did have um just uh in terms of consultation with

[47:46] Tourism Tofino and the Chamber of Commerce in terms of um just feedback in

[47:50] terms of what they anticipated the the impacts might be in

[47:53] terms of tourism. Um I'm I'm certainly um

[47:57] supportive of raising those revenues, but I just want to be cautious that you

[48:01] know, it is not a it's not an inexpensive place to come

[48:04] visit. So, I was just wondering if there was consultation at all with Tourism

[48:08] Tofino and the chamber regarding those paid parking fees.

[48:12] » Uh through the chair, not specifically and directly. There was consultation as

[48:16] we did roll out the paid parking year for this year.

[48:23] If the committee wishes, staff can consult

[48:28] with Tourism Tofino and and the chamber as we continue to move through

[48:33] the bylaw amendments. >> I think it would be I think it would

[48:35] just be important to keep that that conversation um

[48:40] you know, council will decide on in the end, but certainly just to have that

[48:44] input just to help us inform what the potential impacts might be

[48:48] perceived impacts might be in terms of that

[48:52] potential increase to those fees. Um

[48:55] Councilor Anderson, did you did you think about that second

[48:58] » Yeah, there was I support consolidating fees and so on.

[49:03] » Yeah, I think that's broad consensus across the board. Of course, makes

[49:06] sense. And Mayor Law, did you have anything maybe you want to add in terms

[49:10] of you've heard some of the pieces from the rest of council to help

[49:16] see what the rest of council was thinking.

[49:17] » I think I concur with

[49:21] » We'll have another chance to We'll have

[49:23] another chance to discuss this at the next regular council, so by then maybe

[49:27] we'll see what staff

[49:32] » Um I think since you mentioned it, I would be

[49:36] not in favor of moving the year back to April 1st.

[49:40] Um so, basically keeping it where it is because uh

[49:47] as one of the goals of Tourism Tofino and the Chamber of Commerce is to push

[49:51] the off-season tourism. I do recognize that not having to pay for parking is

[49:57] one of the things that may factor into people's decisions. And if we're trying

[50:01] to encourage people to come in the rainier months, them not having to walk

[50:06] this far may also be an incentive for them.

[50:10] » After sorry, that was certainly one of the considerations I thought to

[50:13] incentivize that shoulder season and and that's why the consultation maybe with

[50:17] the chamber and tourism to you know, that was my one concern. We really would

[50:20] like to see people that coming as much in or to incentivize that shoulder

[50:25] season. So with increasing the parking fees in those time frames.

[50:29] I I know many people do travel outside of the peak periods because they can

[50:33] take advantage of those the lower cost of these things.

[50:36] » don't have the free shuttle then. >> And we do not have the free shuttle. We

[50:38] do do have transit though. We do have paid transit. So

[50:42] um Great. Well, thank you. I think um

[50:44] um counselor explain.

[50:46] » Yeah, I want to follow up comments in regards to that. I was thinking like

[50:50] when we're reviewing this is one of the reasons we developed the downtown pay

[50:54] parking was not to to gain funds although we

[50:58] discovered it's really a useful source. Um was to move traffic. And I think when

[51:04] we're looking at April, that's starting to look at

[51:07] gaining revenue and not moving traffic and moving people in the spot.

[51:12] » Yeah, thank you. Good point. Um

[51:16] Mr. Kirkland, do you do you have enough information now um or is there anything

[51:19] else that we may have missed in terms of um feedback on on the regulation?

[51:24] » Uh through the chair, I think I have enough

[51:28] information to come back to council and and comments uh readings of of future

[51:34] amendment bylaws and in for there's work that we can that

[51:39] staff can do to consult with the chamber and tourism to you

[51:42] know, to do that to help inform the decisions of

[51:46] expansion of pay parking so on and so forth.

[51:50] » Good luck. >> I just wanted to say that I think I'm

[51:52] persuaded by Councillor Sawyer and Councillor Sloan

[51:55] change the dates.

[52:00] » I think you're probably looking at it almost a majority of that but certainly

[52:03] maybe some feedback tourism to see

[52:07] you know if there's a perceived impact but certainly the points brought up by

[52:10] Councillor Sloan Sawyer are very relevant.

[52:14] Um Councillor Manson

[52:16] » Um something that occurred to me in parking a little while back too was I'm

[52:21] wondering if there's any uh we're getting any feedback or any

[52:26] interest in creating EV parking spots.

[52:31] You know, I don't know. It's this bylaw wants to anticipate that.

[52:40] I think eventually

[52:44] famous EV spots that might have a different fee schedule.

[52:50] » Lock down Mr. Kirkland is that something that's uh been contemplated? I didn't

[52:55] see it in the report but um that's something that's been called I

[52:58] know with the co-op and the number of EV stations there and out of tourism to

[53:02] Tofino the EV charging stations there of course here there

[53:05] as as a spot as well as that's something that's been considered to within the

[53:09] conversation. >> Um through the chair we

[53:13] there is other spaces that we have looked at in

[53:16] looking into EV and and looking into long-term like maintenance

[53:21] and costs that it would be associated with. There's if that's where where

[53:25] you're where that was one of that as well.

[53:28] Um but we can certainly look into it a little bit more into the

[53:32] future and then we can perhaps include something in a future report that speaks

[53:37] to that question. >> Okay.

[53:41] » We can look at that at the next meeting. >> Okay.

[53:44] Um for the rest of you I don't see anyone

[53:46] with their hands up, so thank you Mr. Curtlin once again. There's a number of

[53:49] recommendations um

[53:52] around of us here. Who would like to take take this one on? Thank you

[53:55] Counselor Wright.

[54:07] » So, I move that the Committee of the Whole

[54:11] recommends Council that staff be authorized to prepare amendments to

[54:14] District of Tofino Traffic and Parking Regulation Bylaw number 1091 2009.

[54:21] » Seconded by Counselor Thomas. All those in favor?

[54:25] Seeing none opposed, motion carried. >> I move that the Committee of the Whole

[54:28] recommends Council that staff be authorized to prepare amendments to

[54:32] District of Tofino Fees and Charges Bylaw number 1271 2019.

[54:37] » Seconded by Counselor Thomas. All those in favor?

[54:40] Seeing none opposed, motion carried. >> I move that the Committee of the Whole

[54:44] recommends to Council that staff be authorized to prepare amendments to

[54:48] District of Tofino Municipal Ticket Information System Bylaw number 1088

[54:53] 2009. >> Seconded by Counselor Thomas. All those

[54:56] in favor? Seeing none opposed, motion carried.

[54:59] » And I move that the Committee of the Whole recommends to Council that staff

[55:03] be authorized to prepare amendments to District of Tofino Notice Adjudication

[55:07] Bylaw number 1107 2010.

[55:11] » Seconded by Counselor Thomas. All those in favor?

[55:13] Seeing none opposed, motion carried. That

[55:18] uh I think is there anything else on Oh, but it looks like you're probably

[55:22] So, you don't have to sit down. Next up on the agenda, a draft uh water supply

[55:26] policy, a report from infrastructure and public works.

[55:30] » That's simple water in there. >> Here, here.

[55:40] » All right. So, the uh next presentation that I have for the committee is on the

[55:45] district's draft private water supply policy

[55:49] uh for information, discussion, and direction.

[55:53] This work builds on earlier updates to council regarding water system

[55:57] performance in response to the increasing interest that we are all

[56:01] seeing from applicants in using private water systems

[56:05] their developments during the summer and early fall something in those times.

[56:16] In late 2025, staff advised council that a policy on private water supply would

[56:21] be developed in 2026. Uh the topic also came up in discussions

[56:26] during the repeal of the limits to growth policy.

[56:30] Since then, staff have continued to see growing interest in in private interest

[56:35] and wells, rainwater harvesting, and treatment-based systems as a way to

[56:40] reduce reliance on the municipal system during peak demand months.

[56:44] At present, these proposals are reviewed on a case-by-case basis.

[56:49] This can lead to inconsistent expectations and variable design

[56:54] standards. A formal policy will provide clarity for applicants, it will support

[56:59] staff's decision-making, and align with council's strategic focus on water

[57:04] security. Implementation will likely require

[57:09] amendments to the water utility bylaw to ensure the policy is aligned with

[57:13] existing authorities.

[57:28] The draft policy establishes a structured approach for proposals that

[57:32] rely on private water systems sources during the restricted months, which are

[57:37] defined in the draft policies July 1st to September 30th.

[57:42] The purpose is to support responsible growth while protecting the watershed

[57:46] and ensuring that development during peak periods does not exceed the

[57:50] capacity of the municipal system. The policy also recognizes examples of a

[57:56] range of private sources, as I mentioned in the last slide, groundwater,

[58:00] rainwater harvesting and treatment based systems as three examples.

[58:05] Um each of these carry different risks, design considerations, and reliability

[58:10] expectations.

[58:15] Um this policy requires applicants to

[58:19] demonstrate that proposed systems are reliable,

[58:22] include appropriate storage, and are designed and sealed by qualified

[58:26] professionals. Storage must be sized

[58:30] to support the level of demand reduction proposed.

[58:34] Policy doesn't require storage for the full

[58:37] um amount of usage during the restriction restricted months in every

[58:42] case, but applicants must show that the system can reasonably achieve the

[58:46] intended or designed for reduction. As a general benchmark, the draft policy

[58:52] currently notes that the district may consider systems sized to provide

[58:56] approximately 50% of the projected restricted months demand where supported

[59:01] by a qualified professional and rate reasonable

[59:04] rainfall or refill assumptions. This is not a requirement, but it is

[59:10] included to give applicants a practical reference point for the scale of storage

[59:15] needed to meaningfully reduce municipal demand during

[59:18] the defined restricted months. Acceptance of a private system does not

[59:24] guarantee the performance by the district.

[59:26] Responsibility operation and maintenance requirements required remains with the

[59:31] private property owner. This will be further reinforced by an

[59:36] section 219 covenant where appropriate.

[59:41] These covenants will ensure that the use and maintenance of the private water

[59:45] system and the level of demand uh reduction committed to is maintained

[59:50] during the restricted months. Policy also reinforces is that

[59:55] unauthorized municipal water use during peak periods may result in enforcement

[1:00:00] under the water utility bylaw.

[1:00:04] Following committee review, staff will refine the draft policy, prepare any

[1:00:09] necessary bylaw amendments in consultation with legal counsel, and

[1:00:13] return to council with the final policy and related amendments for

[1:00:17] consideration.

[1:00:21] Staff are also seeking committee direction on whether engagement should

[1:00:25] occur before the policy is finalized. So, a few options could include

[1:00:30] proceeding directly to a final policy based on committee feedback.

[1:00:35] Uh targeted engagement with developers, builders, and larger water users, which

[1:00:39] staff are suggesting. Or a a general broader engagement

[1:00:44] platforms such as Talk to Fenelon and social media.

[1:00:48] Um engagement may help along the way of finalizing the the draft policy. Um it

[1:00:54] may help clarify reduce future challenges in

[1:00:58] administrating the policy, and ensure the policy reflects practical

[1:01:01] considerations.

[1:01:04] With that, I will leave the recommendations on the screen, and

[1:01:09] I'm here to take any questions and any discussion. Thank you.

[1:01:13] » Thank you again, Mr. Curtin. I know this is something we've been looking forward

[1:01:16] to. I think the community has been looking forward to this uh forward. Look

[1:01:19] to Committee will start uh ask whatever you

[1:01:24] want, or so. >> Um well, I guess the big question is

[1:01:28] really what are the words on public engagement

[1:01:32] and I support fairly broad and targeting public engagement.

[1:01:38] Um it's in the interest of

[1:01:41] of showing that we're active on

[1:01:45] water and serious about water

[1:01:49] usage and um

[1:01:53] and also to keep keep it on top of mind the public as well and increase increase

[1:01:59] the opportunities for education around this.

[1:02:04] All things that I would support. Um

[1:02:09] so that's that's one point. The other point I had on was

[1:02:14] as we go through this and I guess it would be a

[1:02:17] more to do with the water fee schedule might be another

[1:02:24] follow up after this policy is adopted, but we do bill

[1:02:30] for water and sewage based on metered water metered water use. So, I think

[1:02:36] that needs to be something thought of about as as we do allow for

[1:02:42] other uses how are we going to compensate for that that sewer part for

[1:02:50] the water bill. Um

[1:02:52] but it doesn't show up on the meters for now.

[1:02:55] on source. Thank you.

[1:02:59] » Through the chair, I can provide some clarity on that. Um

[1:03:02] later this year staff will be working on a sewer and water utility rate review

[1:03:07] and part of that would be um making adjustments to the sewer

[1:03:12] utility bylaw where systems rely on or partially rely on private water systems

[1:03:17] and and looking at how there can be rate equity that can be achieved. Some

[1:03:23] possible examples could be putting meters on some properties that that

[1:03:28] would meter how much sewer and or waste effluent is discharged into the

[1:03:33] district's sanitary collection system.

[1:03:38] I'm sorry. Maryland and then septic tanks.

[1:03:42] » Thank you. I support public engagement on this. I feel like it'd be a valuable

[1:03:47] time for us to learn about some individual scenarios that we might be

[1:03:52] seeing and get staff time to prepare for the different types of homes and uses of

[1:03:59] private properties. So, we'll be at flying for this.

[1:04:02] As far as Counselor Anderson's point about um

[1:04:08] the water entering the wastewater system in the summer,

[1:04:12] I believe through the chair that this might be beneficial as low flow can be

[1:04:15] something that can be more difficult to deal with in the summer if we're having

[1:04:20] people conserve water, but then it's not moving the waste

[1:04:24] through the system efficiently. Um having people use their own water

[1:04:30] sources could in fact benefit us. I'm not sure if that's accurate. So,

[1:04:36] maybe observation you know. >> Mr. Kerpen.

[1:04:40] » I mean any thoughts on the potential for in

[1:04:43] terms of that potential reduction in volume that we as we ask for people to

[1:04:47] conserve the water, but we also have a lot more people using the system. So,

[1:04:50] I'm wondering if there's a balance there and if that's not somehow affects our

[1:04:53] system. >> If it's a through the chair, it's a a

[1:04:56] great point and question. I I think initially when I

[1:05:01] think about that is the the magnitude and the scale that you

[1:05:05] would have to see to have impact at the actual wastewater treatment plant would

[1:05:09] have to be very great. So, there may be some impact, but it it also may not be

[1:05:15] noticeable from an operational lens as well, but it's definitely something to

[1:05:20] note and as time goes on we can monitor that.

[1:05:25] » I agree.

[1:05:27] » Yeah, just a comment. I have actually going to talk I'll just have a comment

[1:05:30] on that. And then I get a question. Actually the

[1:05:33] one is just considering the sewer, you know,

[1:05:36] not using the water by potentially 50% and then you try and make the difference

[1:05:41] because of the sewer use. I think the idea is that we're incentivizing or

[1:05:44] we're trying to incentivize even with grants

[1:05:47] uh to or people to find novel ways to do this thing. So, I think maybe the the

[1:05:53] idea of finding a way to up the sewer charge is a bit counterproductive.

[1:05:58] We're going to incentivize it, we might as well incentivize it and say

[1:06:02] and that that may be one of the easiest ways to do it is just say

[1:06:08] pay for sewer as much, but uh that's my comment on

[1:06:12] that. But uh question I have is we're we're looking at engagement with

[1:06:16] builders, which I think is great idea right off the bat.

[1:06:20] Um the community, which I think is also a good idea. What about with other

[1:06:23] communities that have policies? I know many communities on

[1:06:28] Vancouver Island have own source water uh

[1:06:32] policies already and and people buy their water or supplement their water

[1:06:36] with rain. So, is is there a way to to And uh maybe it's already happened,

[1:06:41] that's my question. Is has that already happened where

[1:06:44] uh those uh existing policies in other communities have been

[1:06:47] looked at and other, you know, structured crews have been asked for

[1:06:51] their their advice for our situation?

[1:06:54] » Um it's a good question. Through the chair,

[1:06:57] we haven't had any direct staff-to-staff engagement with other communities. I

[1:07:01] have through developing this researched a

[1:07:04] little bit about what other communities are doing and there's not a lot of

[1:07:09] direct private water supply policies and there are

[1:07:14] different unique challenges that different communities face and very

[1:07:18] similar systems that are in place. Uh So, yeah, to answer the question, we

[1:07:23] haven't done a lot of outreach to to to speak with other staff

[1:07:28] at other communities.

[1:07:31] » Yeah, through the chair, just I just have one more follow-up comment that I I

[1:07:34] know other communities [clears throat]

[1:07:37] and people who do supply their own water and and the

[1:07:40] beauty of this I think one of the reasons even if the water rain catchment

[1:07:44] or home source water is insufficient, uh people can bulk purchase water.

[1:07:51] Top it up and and meet their if you do go down the road of

[1:07:57] of a covenant, they can still meet their covenant obligations to supply their own

[1:08:01] water even if the rain capture didn't work. They can

[1:08:05] simply purchase water. So, I I think it's great.

[1:08:10] » Councillor Thomas. >> Thank you. I I'm in favor of

[1:08:15] um consultation with as as broad a group as

[1:08:19] possible. And I think maybe the really direct stuff with the builders and that

[1:08:22] will be useful if there's any feedback on the policy itself and maybe the

[1:08:25] broader community would be more informational.

[1:08:28] Um Cuz there might be people who it doesn't

[1:08:30] directly apply to, but they're very interested to hear what the solutions we

[1:08:33] are coming forward with for the water and then the other comment was just um

[1:08:37] thank you for including item 4.5 in the policy. Uh speaks to Councillor

[1:08:42] Solomon's motion from a couple of years ago about granting

[1:08:45] rain water catchment. So, it was really um

[1:08:48] it was really nice to see that included in this policy.

[1:08:54] » Thank you. Councillor Master.

[1:08:56] » Yeah, I mean, I'll I'd like to read I think it's going to spell would be uh

[1:09:02] uh cross-contamination between our water and their water, but you know, I'm sure

[1:09:07] the safeguards will be in place. I'm just hoping it will be.

[1:09:11] Um I don't like the idea of mentioning the

[1:09:15] desalination. Cuz unless, you know, what's going to

[1:09:19] happen with the salt? Is that that's a big environmental

[1:09:23] problem as well. Uh the way it's written at the moment, I

[1:09:27] wouldn't be in support of that until I have further details.

[1:09:31] Um If people are going to drill wells, I

[1:09:36] want uh specific tests

[1:09:39] to be added to the existing database as to what aquifer we're tapping into and

[1:09:44] what depth. And I think that would help in the future.

[1:09:47] So, it would have to be stipulated in the

[1:09:50] I mean, it's a good start.

[1:09:56] » Thank you. >> Okay, I just want to make sure.

[1:09:58] » I would I'm just saying I think the draft policy is

[1:10:03] is straightforward and complicated and I like that. I wouldn't

[1:10:07] heap too many layers of complexity onto it.

[1:10:11] I think um

[1:10:13] Yeah, correct. I think there's general consensus around the engagement,

[1:10:16] certainly directed and broad and

[1:10:21] from the committee. Um and I wanted to echo Councillor Thomas's uh

[1:10:25] and I I had just a a personal question in terms of the the grant funding for

[1:10:30] the rain catchment systems. Thank you so much. I think uh once again, building on

[1:10:33] the work of Councillor Zwolman's uh motion. Um it

[1:10:38] uh there was a just just a quick question. Um

[1:10:41] There's through the budget process we'll allocate um

[1:10:45] you know, what we we see as appropriate. And I I did a quick bit of research in

[1:10:48] terms of some of those storage tank units and and the hardware associated

[1:10:52] with that. Um and I I had had staff put any thought as to

[1:10:58] in terms of the incentivization and what may be the uptake. Was there any number

[1:11:02] that that jumped out in terms of what might be an appropriate

[1:11:07] grant amount through the budget process? Just something to consider when when I

[1:11:10] looked at like a you know, a 330 gallon IBC tank, you know, it's is almost $900

[1:11:16] before taxes and hardware and installation and all that. Was there Was

[1:11:20] there any thought as to what might be an appropriate amount?

[1:11:24] » Uh through the chair, nothing specific within like for a overall program-wide

[1:11:29] amount. Um we have done through the policy

[1:11:34] identified like what um components of the private of the

[1:11:38] system would be qualified under the grant and have left it at the supply of

[1:11:42] the tank at this time for those very reasons cuz there's

[1:11:45] the bill of materials could grow pretty long and and and how much that would be

[1:11:50] and uh I think

[1:11:52] keeping all of the budgetary information outside of the policy and bringing that

[1:11:56] into the financial planning process is was what our our intent was. So, we

[1:12:00] haven't looked at grouping that like what our

[1:12:03] overall estimate of how many people may or may not be applying for

[1:12:07] the grant would be. So, we haven't done a full estimate on it yet.

[1:12:11] » I I do understand. Yeah, I was just wondering if you had any thought on the

[1:12:14] cost. Um I appreciate the work and sir, look to the committee see if there's any

[1:12:19] other comments or questions. >> I have one comment. It's a bit random,

[1:12:23] but I I've just come back from Edmonton and then there was a an announcement of

[1:12:26] some changes in the build Canada homes uh

[1:12:32] funding stream. There is a new billion-dollar per community fund for

[1:12:38] infrastructure directly related to housing.

[1:12:42] So, [clears throat] you know, I'm not sure where the

[1:12:46] the the grant money is coming from, but it might be an interesting

[1:12:50] something to look at. That's all. I'm just throwing it out there that might be

[1:12:54] an option to pitch to build the new build in Canada homes.

[1:13:04] » So, I see we do have a couple of recommendations on there. Which

[1:13:07] counselor would like to step up and apply this time?

[1:13:12] Thank you, Counselor Lewis. >> I move that Committee of the Whole

[1:13:16] I move that private water supply policy attached as amendments 1 through 7 for

[1:13:20] draft private water supply dated June 9th, 2026 and provide comments and

[1:13:24] direction to staff. >> Seconded.

[1:13:26] Seconded by Counselor McMaster. All those in favor? Seeing none opposed,

[1:13:29] motion carried. >> I move that the Committee of the Whole

[1:13:33] recommends to Council that staff be authorized to prepare an amendment to

[1:13:36] District of Tofino Water Utility Bylaw number 1346-2024

[1:13:41] to align with the private water supply policy as approved.

[1:13:44] » Seconded. Seconded by Counselor McMaster. All those in favor? Seeing

[1:13:47] none opposed, motion carried. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Thank you.

[1:13:52] Next up on the agenda, we have public property use regulation bylaw. We have a

[1:13:56] referral report from Community Services and Mr. McMaster. Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

[1:14:02] Yes, uh just to we'll call a 2-minute point of privilege here.

[1:18:19] » There we go. Now I will reconvene our meeting and if

[1:18:24] we get out of council learning Sorry, if we have Mr. McColl.

[1:18:28] » [laughter]

[1:18:31] » Thank you Katie. I'm back again uh this time to review the public

[1:18:35] property use regulation bylaw.

[1:18:42] So, a bit of the agenda today. I'll go through the legislative background

[1:18:46] and then a few discussion points around complaints, construction permits,

[1:18:49] decibel readers, a jurisdictional scan, potential amendments, and communication.

[1:18:56] So, a bit of background here in 2025, Council received correspondence from the

[1:19:00] public regarding noise nuisance. And the correspondence included a few items

[1:19:05] including construction noise, limited hours, building permit expiration

[1:19:09] concerns, a suggestion for the use of decibel readers, and it was included

[1:19:15] with a petition of 405 signatures supporting restricted hours for

[1:19:20] constructive construction activity related noise.

[1:19:25] Uh at that meeting, Council discussed the correspondence and then passed a

[1:19:29] resolution that the correspondence be referred.

[1:19:34] So, a bit of legislative background in noise nuisance, uh section 64 of the

[1:19:39] Community Charter provides the authority uh for municipal councils to regulate,

[1:19:43] prohibit, and avoid those requirements in relation to nuisances.

[1:19:48] And section 7 of our bylaw, the District of Ucluelet public property use

[1:19:52] regulation bylaw 1098, 2009, uh

[1:19:56] there's a few provisions in there uh that regulates noise um and prohibits it

[1:20:01] between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Uh and fines are escalating from $50 to

[1:20:06] $200. After hours, um when staff aren't able

[1:20:10] to respond, our RCMP are able to enforce um

[1:20:14] uh these matters under the Criminal Code of Canada under a few provisions on that

[1:20:19] fact. So, um staff respond to both formal and

[1:20:23] immediate complaints from residents regarding noise. And over the past 4

[1:20:27] years, about a third of those complaints resulted from bar or restaurant noise,

[1:20:32] about a third from residential noise, 15% from short-term rentals, 10% from

[1:20:37] hotels and resorts, and the remain- remainder being miscellaneous.

[1:20:45] Uh in the letter uh they also mentioned lengthy construction projects that

[1:20:49] sometimes go beyond the regulatory time limit and uh that create noise nuisance.

[1:20:55] And the district's building bylaw uh stipulates that a building permit should

[1:20:59] expire if no substantial construction has commenced for a period of 2 years.

[1:21:04] Um the building bylaw also provides extensions to adjust these delays longer

[1:21:09] than 2 years. Planning and building staff consider

[1:21:12] extending these applications based on several factors, including noise

[1:21:17] complaints, personal financial hardship, hardship based on the availability of

[1:21:21] goods and materials due to supply chain disruptions, and hardships based on

[1:21:26] housing construction staff and skilled labor.

[1:21:29] In staff's experience, it is more likely for a development to exceed the 2-year

[1:21:33] period than for a building permit to be canceled.

[1:21:39] The letter to council also referenced decibel readers as a potential tool for

[1:21:43] bylaw enforcement staff. So, decibel readers is a device that

[1:21:47] measures the intensity of sound in the environment in decibels. And these

[1:21:51] devices are often used in large cities with a complex set of sound emitters.

[1:21:57] To use these devices the devices for effectiveness and procedural fairness, a

[1:22:02] sound mapping exercise is typically done to distinguish between base levels of

[1:22:07] existing or environmental noise and new construction noise.

[1:22:11] Sound mapping includes installing noise meters in different neighborhoods over a

[1:22:15] period of time in each season as rain, wind, and storm activity can produce

[1:22:20] measurable sound that is registered by decibel meter.

[1:22:25] These devices range up to $800 per unit with calibration ancillary devices.

[1:22:31] And during a scan of other communities, staff found that these devices are

[1:22:35] uncommon in resort municipalities and similar sized towns.

[1:22:41] So, staff also conducted a jurisdictional

[1:22:44] scan of other resort municipalities and similar sized communities.

[1:22:48] So, in Whistler, um the prohibitions are actually more

[1:22:52] restrictive than Tofino with weekday and holiday morning prohibitions for

[1:22:56] construction noise and sound. In Ucluelet, uh apparently there their

[1:23:01] noise noise bylaw is very similar to Tofino. Revelstoke is less restrictive

[1:23:06] than Tofino. And Bowen has passed uh has specific prohibitions on construction

[1:23:12] noise, including weeknights and Sunday mornings. And Cumberland has

[1:23:16] prohibitions on construction noise on weeknights, Sunday mornings, and holiday

[1:23:21] mornings. So, a few potential amendments uh that

[1:23:26] council may choose to consider um and mainly to align with other communities

[1:23:32] and also to balance the development and development priorities for the community

[1:23:37] and the community well-being. Staff has have offered some paths to potential

[1:23:41] amendments. So, um uh if council chooses, council could proceed with a

[1:23:46] prohibition for construction noise like the other municipalities I mentioned on

[1:23:49] the previous slide. Uh could add a new definition for construction noise. Um

[1:23:55] and they may choose to permit uh construction noise on weekends and

[1:23:59] statutory holidays. However, with perhaps a delayed start time um or an

[1:24:05] earlier ending and earlier ending days. Um but essentially opening this up

[1:24:11] for a council discussion and and uh and consultation.

[1:24:17] Finally, uh no public consultation has been conducted to date uh for any of

[1:24:21] these amendments, or any pathways here.

[1:24:25] But if council chooses to direct staff to draft amendments tonight,

[1:24:30] a talk to FINA we're to we're suggesting a talk to FINA page be launched after

[1:24:34] first reading. Um

[1:24:36] We'll choose to proceed. With that, happy to open up questions or

[1:24:42] » Yeah, thank you, Mr. McColl. Uh Mayor London

[1:24:46] Looking all around. Uh Counselor Thomas, start and then

[1:24:50] » Good question on that. Um it was about the

[1:24:54] um two-year building permit for the construction as long as construction has

[1:24:59] reasonably um started. And I think when the letter writer who brought up the

[1:25:04] specifics um one year testimony,

[1:25:07] uh her concern was that the construction was ongoing, but there wasn't an end

[1:25:11] date to you've started the project, you have to finish the project. And I was

[1:25:15] wondering if there was um any way you could respond to that concern.

[1:25:22] » Yeah, thank you for the question. >> It's probably like this year, I think.

[1:25:25] » Yeah. Yeah, and happy to refer to director here. Um

[1:25:29] uh that that building bylaw is mostly managed by

[1:25:33] the building inspector. Um so, hesitant to to to comment too much there, but in

[1:25:38] my consultations with building inspector,

[1:25:40] um uh usually there is leeway given to

[1:25:44] uh construction that um lasts longer uh for that for the hardships that I

[1:25:50] mentioned in those extension considerations. Um

[1:25:53] but we are aware of a few building permits that have been canceled um that

[1:25:57] have exceeded. So, um staff use their discretion, but happy to if if you

[1:26:02] choose to expand it further on. >> Yeah, thank you, Anthony Shera.

[1:26:06] Counselor Thomas, um I can't have a conversation with the

[1:26:10] building inspector. It's it it it's it's it's um

[1:26:14] often we're extending. The question I think in this case particularly is how

[1:26:18] long it's extended and how far along are they extended till they get they can

[1:26:22] cancel building permit and the building's three quarters of the way

[1:26:25] and it's it's a it's a quite a financial hardship

[1:26:28] in the millions of dollars. And so this is not I think it's

[1:26:31] definitely an unfortunate situation. That's something I can raise with the

[1:26:35] building inspector to have a conversation about

[1:26:38] what that may look like in the future. I I do take your point that probably

[1:26:42] this one was it wasn't really started and it just

[1:26:45] took him so long.

[1:26:52] » Yeah, I just want to echo what Councillor Thomas says, you know, that

[1:26:56] the the complaints around building really is about the time

[1:27:02] of years that there's excessive noise like in building.

[1:27:06] Construction can be very [clears throat] very So I think

[1:27:09] to balance it, I think it's reasonable to perhaps

[1:27:15] put some kind of weekend limits like Cumberland did on on building because it

[1:27:20] starts to impact, you know, people's lives without in you know, impeding

[1:27:25] building because we don't want to impede building. We don't want to make it

[1:27:29] longer by restricting building. I think there might be some

[1:27:34] some leeway to look at weekend restrictions start and end times for for

[1:27:39] construction noise. So maybe that's probably reasonable.

[1:27:44] » Excuse me. >> Yeah, I

[1:27:46] I think my concerns echo with you that have spoken before me. Um

[1:27:52] I think I'm I spend a lot of time outside of where I

[1:27:55] live and I'm giving company that makes a lot of noise and I don't think it's

[1:27:59] unreasonable to have shorter work hours that noise is permitted because I also

[1:28:05] really value quiet time outside. So I think like

[1:28:08] having some restrictions on Uh I think what was the more

[1:28:13] more strict community um I'm going to hold.

[1:28:18] Like I don't think it's unreasonable to ask them to stop building at 5:00. I

[1:28:21] think what I'm I have concerns cuz I also heard it from one the Headwaters

[1:28:26] complex building was built was um

[1:28:30] they went quite late in the evening cuz the crews come up here so they're

[1:28:33] maximizing their their work were remote communities so they extend from like a

[1:28:37] work from the the allowable hours and I think that's really difficult when you

[1:28:41] can't plan your life around it. So I feel like

[1:28:45] » [clears throat] >> limiting some hours um

[1:28:48] I I feel like having some sort You can always gauge

[1:28:54] the sound mapping was it called? Yeah. I I think that's reasonable as well. Um

[1:28:59] you wouldn't want to live next to something really loud all the time.

[1:29:03] Um And then what was the other one?

[1:29:07] Yeah, um I I feel like I understand the situation

[1:29:11] you have a permit for 2 years. You've done a lot of work like the letter

[1:29:15] writer has said that work has been going on so it would automatically apply for

[1:29:21] having work done. But I I feel like in this situation the work has been going

[1:29:25] on for so long if hindsight couldn't have given us the

[1:29:30] opportunity to to pressure the builder to do it in a faster period and

[1:29:35] and then we wouldn't be in this situation so

[1:29:38] I think going forward maybe it would be valuable to have some sort of

[1:29:43] situation that we could encourage people to have their

[1:29:47] construction done in a short amount.

[1:29:55] » Eric, is there anyone else in the Councillor Slater Councillor Wrightson

[1:29:59] with that to my left? >> I'm now looking at the big picture here.

[1:30:03] The more numerous complaints were from restaurants and for entertainment noise.

[1:30:10] So, I do see the value in installing decibel meters there.

[1:30:14] So, it does feel like we're talking about two things here. We're talking

[1:30:17] about the you know, personal impact

[1:30:21] of construction noise when people tend to live around a construction site and

[1:30:25] we're talking about general noise created by businesses that is ongoing

[1:30:29] and not contained to years. So,

[1:30:33] um wherever we land on the day or week

[1:30:37] or time restrictions for construction specific noise, I definitely support

[1:30:41] decibel meters to make sure that we're monitoring what the same way we monitor

[1:30:47] like pollution and you know, um

[1:30:50] form [clears throat] and character

[1:30:53] um that we're maintaining our character. >> So, for clarification for me, when you

[1:30:59] say I use support decibel meters, like the purchase of a a district?

[1:31:04] » Yeah, like the um sound through the drain that Mr. McCauley was speaking

[1:31:08] about where you would install it in around a neighborhood and you would

[1:31:11] measure the flow of sound throughout the year and be able to set that baseline.

[1:31:19] » Uh you know, I wrote down Counselor

[1:31:21] Anderson and then Mayor McCauley. >> Yeah, there

[1:31:24] there's two different

[1:31:27] kind of two two things as well. There's there's noise levels that

[1:31:32] come from other activities other than construction and then

[1:31:37] the construction noise is a different kind of noise

[1:31:42] than loud music or or loud very loud loud people or something like

[1:31:47] that. So, both can cause disturbances, but

[1:31:52] construction I see more as as an activity that you're

[1:31:58] kind of limiting the time frame of rather than noise.

[1:32:03] So, I'm

[1:32:07] I'm I'm just wondering if if the communities that did limit the

[1:32:14] the have have limits on noise, what was it Were any of them limiting

[1:32:20] the activity where you could have construction, or was it all just about

[1:32:24] noise? And

[1:32:28] construction disturbing fluid. Exactly. >> Yeah, exactly. Thank you for the

[1:32:34] question. That's very interesting. Um yeah, in in several of the municipal

[1:32:38] municipalities, they define construction noise, and they have additional

[1:32:41] provisions or restrictions specifically to construction noise. Um so, noise that

[1:32:46] has its regular permitted hours, and then construction noise is often further

[1:32:51] restricted um for uh weekends, statutory holidays, and earlier weeknights. I

[1:32:58] don't know if that makes sense.

[1:33:02] » I just a question through the chair about the well, decibel meter. Now,

[1:33:06] there's I know there's official Center for Disease Control apps that can go on

[1:33:11] your iPhone and they give you uh an official sound uh decibel

[1:33:17] reading. Are you For the $3,000 to $8,000, are

[1:33:20] you you talking about uh permanent or movable

[1:33:25] piece of hardware? >> Yeah, no, these would be mobile devices

[1:33:29] that officers would use to enforce against the the noise bylaw. Um and they

[1:33:34] come with uh further calibration devices. That's why the cost is quite

[1:33:39] high. Um they start at a much lower, but they can be up to $8,000 per device. And

[1:33:45] then the the sound mapping exercise is kind of like to have established the the

[1:33:50] baseline. Um so, that they can use that understanding

[1:33:53] when seeing the the bylaw in different particular neighborhoods.

[1:34:02] » Um one thing I was thinking about is like

[1:34:05] when we we discuss all this, there is the provision in there for the for

[1:34:08] anyone who feels that they can't work within the new parameters that are set

[1:34:12] going forward, they can come to council still and they can

[1:34:16] we can give them permission to do whatever they need to do.

[1:34:21] But it just limits the ongoing noise or

[1:34:31] » Go ahead. >> Uh decibel meters are

[1:34:36] » [laughter] >> a real problem separating the ambient

[1:34:38] noise from the actual issue. >> If you like that

[1:34:43] » you'd be spending a lot of money for nothing positive. Plus often

[1:34:48] [clears throat] the noise complaint can be

[1:34:51] you know, at that particular time rather than

[1:34:54] ongoing. So unless the by-law officer happens to be right there when that uh

[1:34:59] saw fires up or something like that, you know, something like that.

[1:35:03] It's not worth the effort. So um

[1:35:08] I think a lot of construction noise mostly complaints tend to be early

[1:35:11] morning. Um

[1:35:13] not at 5:00. I think people get upset when they hear something fires up at say

[1:35:18] 7:30 or 8:00 or something like that. I agree. I think it would be good to see

[1:35:23] some restrictions on the noise at the weekend. People deserve that.

[1:35:29] Um I think we also have to figure that the more we make it difficult to build,

[1:35:34] the more expensive it's going to be to buy a house.

[1:35:38] Or affordable housing and so it's a very fine line, but I certainly

[1:35:42] wouldn't support decibel meters.

[1:35:46] I mean, after using it at the legion um to no success.

[1:35:54] » Perfect. >> Yeah.

[1:35:54] » Um I just had a question around through the chair

[1:35:59] around the building permit. So,

[1:36:03] they expire if you haven't started significant construction, but once

[1:36:08] you've started significant construction, do they never

[1:36:13] expire? Do they Are they finished at point of occupancy?

[1:36:18] If you read part of your house unfinished,

[1:36:22] but have occupancy, does the building permit continue indefinitely?

[1:36:29] Just because I remember that the original letters

[1:36:33] referenced some municipalities where the building

[1:36:38] permit is sort of contains the construction

[1:36:42] period. So, and I don't I don't see anything

[1:36:47] or hear anything about it. About that.

[1:36:51] » Probably outside of your knowledge base, but I can Mr. Rogers.

[1:36:56] » Uh thank you and to the chair. I can speak to a high level. I don't have the

[1:36:59] bottom in front of me. A couple years is what I made in it, but

[1:37:02] from what I understand, uh they don't expire once they're issued

[1:37:06] unless there's an extended time. That's kind of a consideration that the

[1:37:10] building inspector has to make like how many how much What is that extended

[1:37:13] time? There's some gray area in those things because we've all talked about,

[1:37:18] you know, not everybody can build a house in 6 months. It takes 2 years to

[1:37:21] build a house. Financial problems. There's a million different reasons why

[1:37:23] things don't finish on time. And what you know, where we've kind of aired

[1:37:28] on, you know, up to now has been trying to get people to get their houses built

[1:37:33] without causing them financial hardship. In this case, again, I you know, this is

[1:37:39] an egregious case. How long it's taken and how noisy it's

[1:37:43] been. Um but it's really the only one that

[1:37:46] I've that I know in my 18 years here that we've had this significant issues.

[1:37:51] I think the you know, as you're McCall put up on this the slide at how many

[1:37:55] complaints we have, none of them are related to construction noise except

[1:37:58] So I don't So I don't I don't think I think we have to be careful about making

[1:38:01] policy that it you know it it's it's responding

[1:38:05] to one specific instance versus what it's going to benefit the community. And

[1:38:09] I say that with full empathy for the what this neighbor has had to go through

[1:38:13] and and and wouldn't wish it on anybody, but um

[1:38:16] you know, as we make decisions the decisions about potentially changing

[1:38:20] weekend construction seems like the the wisest choice of action probably the

[1:38:24] best place for us to be. >> Yeah, I just wanted to understand how it

[1:38:29] worked and and because the letter did have

[1:38:33] that

[1:38:37] Yeah. Sure, I just never thought about the decibel meter and I realized, you

[1:38:41] know, I've got a noise n o i n o and I o s h meter on there, but I

[1:38:46] realize you can't you there's no way you could use that uh to to for bylaw or

[1:38:51] work safety C or anything. Uh which made me think uh you know,

[1:38:56] councillor Masters points that uh there'll have to be a professional

[1:39:00] decibel meter, you know, registered if anybody was to use that for enforcement

[1:39:06] uh and then you know, a baseline enforcement as Mr. Councillor Masters

[1:39:10] says there's going to be issues with the ambient noise. So I just after all that

[1:39:13] just thinking about that and listening to I think you know,

[1:39:16] it simply a start and end date on a weekend for

[1:39:20] construction or something like that would would

[1:39:23] suffice. Uh then it would we could avoid all of that uh

[1:39:28] issues that that would thoughts on.

[1:39:33] » Yep. Um my comments were just going to be I'm in favor of limiting the hours

[1:39:38] just on weekends and statutory holidays knowing that weekdays I know Saturday

[1:39:42] and Sunday are really long time with something with benefit And think about

[1:39:46] construction maybe outside of building homes when we think about work on the

[1:39:49] back lawn or things like that where it's nice to be able to go and get that done

[1:39:53] maybe before there's a lot of activity out.

[1:39:56] Um so, leaving the weekdays alone. And now, with the decimal reader, I

[1:40:00] don't think it's a good use of district funds. Um noting that we don't

[1:40:06] have bylaw staff to respond to things after hours. The RCMP will be able to

[1:40:10] respond to things. The limited amount of noise complaints that have come through.

[1:40:14] It just seems like a really big chunk of money and a large amount of staff time

[1:40:18] to go out and map these areas and do all those things when I think we have so

[1:40:21] much higher priorities from bylaw enforcement

[1:40:25] when we look at short-term rentals or some of the other things that we've

[1:40:29] we've talked about as priorities around the table.

[1:40:35] » So, if to in summary, and I I don't think I know you've been listening, but

[1:40:39] just in summary, it seems that there's not a lot of support for the purchase of

[1:40:42] of that decimal reader.

[1:40:45] Um and it looks like in terms of And I think the the point being brought up in

[1:40:48] terms of the I mean, it's been identified there's two issues really

[1:40:52] that that have been identified. The letter

[1:40:54] writer had said they had endured an egregious situation that

[1:40:59] brought this to our attention, and that is to be recognized. And but then, when

[1:41:05] we look at the actual stats and the data that you presented to us, it does

[1:41:09] indicate that the vast majority are outside of that particular construction

[1:41:13] area. So, the the idea, and I think it's a generally a

[1:41:18] good idea is is to look at community well-being in terms of those

[1:41:22] restrictions around timing and when that might be. And it seems there's a

[1:41:26] broad consensus around weekends limiting those times to

[1:41:31] Well, wait to see what they You've heard some of the recommendations

[1:41:35] here. So, I think as a general, you have enough information to help you to move

[1:41:39] forward from what you heard from the council tonight.

[1:41:41] » Absolutely. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. McColl. Not counselor.

[1:41:48] » Sorry, just a final comment. Did Did we discuss opening this up to

[1:41:52] the community for feedback? We can. So, I think that I mean it might come back

[1:41:56] that community may say, "Well, you know what?

[1:41:58] We really want to be able to

[1:42:02] build houses on Saturday." Something. So,

[1:42:06] » [laughter] >> Yeah, [clears throat] I'll I'll add two

[1:42:08] things. Yeah, so I'll need a formal recommendation from council to uh I'll

[1:42:12] be authorized to draft those amendments for um the bylaw and then uh the

[1:42:17] communication plan uh suggested after first reading. Um the

[1:42:22] bylaw go to talk to the community public consultation for feedback on.

[1:42:26] » Uh

[1:42:29] So nice when I see those recommendations. I think that I don't

[1:42:32] have to do that. Um did any of the councilors want to

[1:42:36] make that uh what can I If If you want to just

[1:42:39] repeat, I can you know from the from the chair I can

[1:42:43] » Yeah, I've got a recommendation here that staff be authorized to draft

[1:42:47] amendments to the public property certain activities bylaw pertaining to

[1:42:51] restricting construction hours on weekends.

[1:42:55] » I'll make that motion from the chair. >> [clears throat]

[1:42:59] » Committee recommends. >> Thank you. Uh yes.

[1:43:03] Uh I'll make that motion from the chair. All those

[1:43:06] I'm looking at any Counselor Thomas. Anything to comment?

[1:43:10] » Before we vote on it, I just have a comment. Um

[1:43:13] just for clarity. So, within the noise bylaw there is

[1:43:17] breakdowns in the subsections of what type of noise and there is a subsection

[1:43:21] that directly references construction noise. Are we just going to be altering

[1:43:26] the or getting feedback on that subsection

[1:43:30] for limitation or are we going to be making another bylaw and calling it

[1:43:35] construction noise as was referenced. Because um that was a

[1:43:39] point made that some municipalities have their own construction noise bylaw.

[1:43:44] Whereas our noise bylaw currently this is a small

[1:43:47] section that defines it. >> Mr. McCall for comment. Thank you for

[1:43:52] your question, Councillor Sawyer. Um yeah, the the direction here is just to

[1:43:57] amend the current bylaw to add those provisions to restrict that the noise

[1:44:02] that construction noise will begin. Um but staff aren't at this point

[1:44:06] recommending a whole new bylaw, just amending the current bylaw is fine.

[1:44:11] » 728

[1:44:15] » Uh with that any further comments? Well, then I'll call the question. All

[1:44:20] those in favor. And the motion carried. Was there a

[1:44:24] second one there? Mr. McCall, no, that was it. Excellent. Okay, great.

[1:44:27] » [laughter] >> Thank you.

[1:44:29] » All right. Well, looks like we've a good part of the agenda finished. Uh

[1:44:33] there is no unfinished business and I'll look up to Mr. Planner if there are any

[1:44:37] questions there well, maybe in the gallery as well

[1:44:41] as potentially online. >> Thank you, Councillor Steer. I will now

[1:44:44] make an open call for questions from those present in the gallery and those

[1:44:48] participating online. For those in the gallery who wish to speak, please raise

[1:44:52] your hand. If there is anyone attending online via Zoom who would like to ask a

[1:44:56] question, please do so now using the Q&A function.

[1:45:00] Before asking a question, you will need to state your name, your address, and

[1:45:03] the agenda item you're asking to. I will now do a poll.

[1:45:07] Calling once. Calling twice.

[1:45:11] Calling three times. There are no comments at this time, Councillor Steer.

[1:45:15] » Great. Thank you. Um I'll move from the chair then to move

[1:45:18] us into closed uh that the meeting be closed

[1:45:21] to the public pursuant to sections 92 B1 and 92 B3 of the community charter to

[1:45:27] discuss matters relating to 92 B the consideration of information received

[1:45:32] and held in confidence relating to negotiations

[1:45:35] between the municipality and a provincial government or the federal

[1:45:38] government or both or between a provincial government or the federal

[1:45:41] government or both and a third party three between the municipality and a

[1:45:46] first nation or prescribed indigenous entity or between a first nation or

[1:45:51] prescribed indigenous entity and a third party.

[1:45:54] Seconded by All those in favor

[1:45:58] Anyone not opposed? Motion carried. We'll take uh uh

[1:46:01] a minute, 5 minutes, whatever it takes to

[1:46:04] close Thank you. All right.

Committee of the Whole - 09 Jun 2026

Transcript