Okay, I think we'll get going. It's uh 10:03 by my clock. [clears throat]
Um first of all, uh I'd like to
respectfully acknowledge that we are meeting today on the traditional
territories of the Vasanish people comprising the Saudin
and Malahhat First Nations who have lived on a steward of the Sanish
Peninsula since time and memorial.
First item on the agenda is approval of the agenda.
It's been circulated. Can I have a motion to approve it?
Councelor Batista. >> Agenda.
» Oh, that's right. Yeah. Um, sorry, Councelor Batista. I um I forgot
that we're moving uh item number eight up after 4 A. So, it'll be u I guess
we'll call it five and move the other ones down. It'll still be the same.
» Okay. >> So, so what is it? 8A.
» Uh 8A because the uh people who are presenting um would like to leave after
the presentation. >> Okay.
» Okay. May I entertain a motion uh to approve the agenda as what have I done
now? >> Oh, you're doing great. I think
» it Okay. Sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead. So, yes.
» Oh, I just wanted to uh add to the agenda. um looking for and and
discussing the um accessible parking um zoning bylaw at North Sanage just to
kind of uh give a a background and looking for an update on that.
» Okay. >> Do we um make that
» should we just put it in after the Wayne?
» Yes, we'll make item 18.
» Now we're good. Seeing no more changes, I'll entertain a motion to approve the
agenda as uh amended. All Charlene me second.
All in favor? Carried.
Uh approval of the minutes. I did note one uh spelling error
that changes [clears throat] the meaning a little bit. So I'll mention that in
22C um the word accessibly
is noted in two places and it should be in both cases accessibility
changes >> any other modifications
» just um just some comments and I've had a bit of a discussion with staff on this
already but um some of the feedback back that I've been getting on on minutes
from mayor, CEO, and others is that it needs the recommendations
or the motions that were uh putting forward need to be clear so they can
understand what it is. um were were kind of
so um so instead of saying in the minutes, you know, uh feedback was given
to central Senate on this active transportation plan or whatever it is
that the following feedback was provided and then just in bullets so that you
know council can see what it is is the feedback um that's provided and then
also similarly in um in in the uh the motions need to be clear. So the one of
the motions that was problematic, it was I think we made a motion about um
discussion of uh that that the municipalities would discuss
accessibility concerns with the airport. And so the question I got back was what
were the concerns? I said, "Oh, I think there was something about this or that."
But I had to go replay the the meeting again.
Anyways, that's just kind of a >> Yeah, I totally agree. Even by the time
I get the minutes, I can't remember the specifics.
» Yeah. So, just for us to be uh mindful when we're making the motions and making
our points, but that's clear. >> Okay. And I'll make sure I review them
because I get them first. >> Okay.
» I'll review them with that in mind, too. Good comment. Oh, morning. Sorry, I'm
late. You're right on time.
Uh any other comments?
Entertain a motion for approval of the minutes.
» Second and Charlene. All in favor?
Um against any carried. Okay. The next item will then be the uh
right fit program presentation. I believe. Are they
uh prepared? Is Lindsay with us? [clears throat]
» Hello. >> Oh, hi Linds.
» Can you hear me? Hello. >> Yeah, that was good.
» Hi. Um, yeah, my program manager I think is running a minute or two late, but I
can go ahead and get started to just make sure you guys are on track for your
meeting. Oh, there she is. Perfect timing.
» Hi, Isabelle. We're just about to get started on our presentation now. Good
every good morning everyone. >> Morning.
» Um should I go ahead and share my screen?
» Yes please. Yes. >> Okay.
[clears throat]
» Perfect. >> Okay. See
» I can't see the Oh, there we are. Okay. Great. Excellent. Okay. Well, uh good
morning everyone. We're very excited to to be here. Thank you for welcome. Oh,
somebody waiting in the lobby. Okay, I got a little notification there.
Uh we're very excited to to be here and present the right fit program. So, thank
you for making uh space in your agenda for us. So, um you can go to to the next
slide. U Lindy. >> Oops.
Yeah, we'll do a a really quick intro. Oh. Uh, introduction slide back.
» Oh, yeah. I think sorry it might be lagging a bit. Is it okay? No worries.
Yes. Okay. Yes. So, my name is Isabelle Brock. I'm the rightf program manager
for Disability Alliance BC and I'm excited to be joined by Lindseay Simpson
who's uh the CRD housing coordinator for for DABC for for the right fed. So, um
we're we're pretty very happy to be here with you today. Um, I just want to give
you a bit of overview of Disability Alliance BC. I don't know how much you
know about DABC um here, but we're uh provincial
disability voice since 1977. So, we've been around for a long time. And our
organization supports people with all disabilities to live with dignity,
independence, and as equal and full participants in the community. Uh, DABC
offers a really wide range of programs. So I won't go through that list
extensively because we have a limited time. Um but we help we support um
people with disabilities with a a number of uh programs, tax aid, we have a
disability law clinic uh that provides free legal advice to people with
disabilities. Um we have an access advocacy access program which supports
um uh people with disabilities with their PWD applications. Uh we have a
program also that supports people with disability to access the uh DTC
disability tax credit and we also manage the right fit program which is the
program that brings us here today. Next. Yeah. Uh okay. So what is the right fit?
The right fit is a service that addresses the crisis in accessible
housing. And we address this crisis by matching affordable accessible homes and
independent living supports with people who need it in the lower mainland and
now in the CRD.
We we have several goals with this program. We were created in 2017, so
we've been around almost for 10 years. We wanted to better utilize the existing
supply to make sure that every accessible units go to people who really
need those units. We wanted to inventory every available unit to make sure that
it's truly accessible, but also to get a better understanding of what's what's
available out there, increase housing affordability, uh address the supply
gap, and also raise awareness about housing accessibility.
So why why why did we um decide to form the right fit program about almost 10
years ago? Uh that's because we had come to an understanding that wheelchair
users were facing um incredible challenges when it came to finding and
securing accessible housing. Uh first of all there's a limited supplies not many
accessible affordable housing being u uh available for wheelchair users. Um and
then it's it's a time it it takes. So as you know when you're moving into a unit
uh it's it's it's quite complex. But when you think about a wheelchair users
wanting to move to into an accessible housing unit that's even more uh
complicated. you have to have time to arrange home supports, specialized
equipment. So what hasn't meant is that generally when is a scarce accessible
unit being available then a wheelchair user would not be able to to compete and
get this unit just because of the time it takes. So uh being able to um uh to
get the the unit was not possible and what that means is that those wear
accessible units are going to people who don't need those accessible features. Uh
the other uh added challenge with this um uh with wheelchair users accessible
and accessible housing is that up to the right fit until the right fit was
created there was no centralized inventory of accessible units for
listing accessibility features. So that meant that the units are there but
nobody really knows where they are, what those units are and what kind of
features they have. So uh the right fed really uh looked to address this issue
by creating that centralized inventory of accessible units. Next slide please.
So um the the right fit is is very much um a partnership model. So we started
out in Metro Vancouver 10 years ago and uh DABC oversees and managed the right
fit program but we're guided for Metro Vancouver by a steering committee that
provides leadership and expertise to everything we do. So we have a number of
member organizations. It includes BC housing uh MSDPR, the health
authorities, the city of Vancouver, Spinal Cord Injury BC, Spark BC, and
VRS, which is a housing provider. And we're now because we're now expanding
into the capital regional district, we're currently forming an advisory
committee uh for the CRD to help ensure that we we understand and uh response to
the unique needs of the of the region. Next slide, please. Thank you.
Um, so the the the right fit in the CRD, what does that look like in Metro
Vancouver? The DABC has been partnering with a a group called the Individualized
Funding Resource Center society, what we call the IFRC. The IFRC is a um an
organizations that's led by people with disabilities and and they in in the
Vancouver region, they manage the aspect of the peer-led navigation model. and
client intakes and housing placement. I will uh uh go back to that uh what that
intake process and peer-led navigation model looks like. But then the CRD we
have we're very proud to have initiated a partnership with the Victoria
Disability Resource Center VDRC. and VDRC will help connect the RightFit
program with community resources, housing providers, wheelchair users, and
um will also help uh strengthen some of our local referral pathways to to
support our peer-led navigation model and uh the VDRC will also co-chair our
ad advisory committee in in the CRD. Uh I should also mention that uh uh
Lindseay our CRD housing coordinator is her office is housed within the office
of uh VDRC. Next slide please.
» Uh this is just a bit of a history of our program. Um I I don't need to go in
great detail uh into this but we we started in as I mentioned almost 10
years ago in 2017. We started as a pilot project to really test the approach of
what we wanted to do and then in 2020 we transitioned from being a pilot to uh
being the right fit program and since then we have really become the one-stop
uh hub for housing providers, tenants, uh service providers, uh everything uh
accessible housing related. Um I must say that we we um there was a research
study that was done a couple years ago by in u in Ontario by university um
there and they surveyed and really took a scan of all services existing for
accessible housing in in Canada and they identified that the right fit program
was the only program in Canada that does what what we do. So we're we're very
proud of uh of being uh the model and the reference but at the same time have
mixed feelings about the fact that there's no other program like ours in
the rest of uh of the country. Um we also now maintains the only existing
centralized inventory of accessible units in the lower mainland with the
standardized accessibility checklist tool. I will come back to that. Um and
then um I guess our next chapter is 2026. We're now expanding beyond Metro
Vancouver and expanding into the capital regional district. So everything that
we've done in Metro Vancouver, we're looking to replicate in uh in the CRD,
including the development of an inventory of accessible and adaptable
housing for for the CRD. Next slide, please.
Thank you. So I just wanted to talk about our approach, the right fit
approach because it's quite quite unique because we operate both on the supply
side and the demand side. So we we match our main goal is to match accessible
homes with the right tenants and this is what we call the right fit. We're
ensuring the right fit for each unit. Uh we help wheelchair users find homes that
meet their accessibility needs. And what I'd like to say about that is that each
unit that we um find um is different. Um they they may not have all full
accessibility features. Some of the units might be adaptable universal
design. Well, we take a look at all of these units. Uh we we don't just look at
fully fully accessible units just because you never know what what will be
the right fit to our clients. They might all be wheelchair users, but they have
very diverse needs. So, so we want to make sure we have um a broad supply of
units to be able to match our clients to those units. So, we also help streamline
access to home support, services, and equipment. We provide personalized
support from intake uh to move in with our dedicated client navigators and we
build and maintain that inventory of accessible housing with our checklist.
So, we'll go back to that. Next slide, please.
uh our eligibility criteria in terms of uh as a client to come into our program.
So applicants for now must be full-time power or manual wheelchair users
including using their chair at home where uh in the midst of slightly
revising those those criteria but this for now our our criteria and applicants
must live in uh uh Vancouver House, Fraser House or now Island Health
authorities. So the full CRD uh geographical scope, so the 30
municipalities as well as the three EAS electoral areas. We have no age
restrictions. We have no income limit or um income requirement and PWD
eligibility is not required for for our program.
Um as I mentioned, we have developed over the years a very unique
peer-to-peer navigation model. We feel it's very important to provide
peer-to-peer support for a person with disability. Um, and the reason for that
is the journey to transition into stable, affordable, accessible housing
is is very complex and there's a lot of uh challenges. So we we want to make
sure we build trust um with our clients and learn about this individual
situation so we can successfully help uh wheelchair users living in
non-accessible housing make a successful transition into accessible housing. So,
we help individuals identify where they want to live, the amenities that are
important to them, the social networks, the kind of neighborhoods they want, but
also we're going to be learning about their specific disabilities because, as
I mentioned, even though they may all be wheelchair users, they have very
different needs um and mobility range. Um, so it's important for us to to
capture that. So uh one of the uh clientele we're serving where we have a
um in Vancouver at least uh a large number of uh uh families so where the
wheelchair user is a child um a young child so the support the supporting
individuals are not wheelchair users. So when we look at placing the specific
clients into units uh they may not require the full range of accessible uh
features but they might prioritize certain features and the size of the
units over the accessibility features. This is why it's so important to have a
a variety of units to uh uh in our inventory to to be able to match our
clients. Uh next slide please. So a little bit more on that navigation
uh model. We uh we we assist Wilshshire users in completing application forms
and navigating BC housing applications and all these complicated uh paperwork
that they have to uh to go through. We review these available units that we
have in our inventory and we match applicants with homes that suits their
specific accessibly needs. We help them uh um gather required documents for
housing providers. We accompani clients through housing interviews and we
provide support uh to the client from the initial intake to the final move in.
We also help facilitate home supports uh to in securing traditional home supports
and we also refer clients to uh what we call the CEO program choices in support
for independent um living program through the IFRC
and we also help with equipment support. So um often wheelchair users will need
uh electric beds, grab bars, some uh uh track ceiling lifts. all sorts of uh
specific equipment needs. And so we we and that they need to have in place when
they move in, which is why before they can't act couldn't accessible units
because the time it takes to to align get everything aligned at the same time.
So we help with fasttracking with those processes and we also help facilitate
installation of um environmental controls um as well as door openers as
well. So a number of of uh additional assistive technology.
So what have we accomplished so far? So we've been in existence since 2017. So
we uh we um uh we um we've updated those numbers. Sorry, there was a note there,
[laughter] but we made 214 successful housing
matches since we existed. That's these are the lower mainland uh numbers. And
uh we will um we'll hope to to just starting now in the CRD. So uh so we'll
be starting matching clients and finding accessible housing now. Um and what I
will just say on this slide is that we're very proud to have uh made that
many matches so far. Um but we also have uh prevented a significant numbers of
individuals from becoming homeless. So homeless uh prevention is a um very much
a focus of our work and so we uh we really uh are very proactive and and
work with u uh the homelessness sector to to really support individuals um uh
that are on the ver at imminent risk of homeless or being homeless to transition
into accessible housing. Uh next slide please.
» Yeah. So, and now I'm going to pass it on to Lindsay who's going to tell you a
bit more about the what we do on the housing provider side. Thank you.
» Yeah. So, in addition to supporting the clients, we also support local housing
providers. So, we work directly with housing providers to help um identify
suitable tenants for them by comparing their accessible unit against our client
intake, which allows us to simplify the matching process for them and and take a
little bit of work off their hands. So when we a housing provider reaches out
to us or we reach out to them and they mention that they have an accessible
unit, we'll coordinate completing our DAPC accessibility checklist and
maintain an inventory of those units. So we overall off uh serve as a resource
for housing providers by both um helping them learn a little bit more about
accessibility through our checklist and then also helping them find the right
tenant for them and support them through the process of that tenant application.
So I'll go a little bit into our checklist, but the ultimate goal is to
better understand the supply and create a more detailed inventory of the
accessible unit supply. So when we go to a unit that may look like the one in
this picture, we create a detailed account of the unit. So we'll measure
the turning radius and counter heights, uh the space for kitchen knee or uh knee
cutouts under kitchen sinks and stoves where um outlets are located. It will
also list the building amenities and neighborhood amenities and then also
track more standard uh apartment things such as pet policies and smoking
policies.
And then so the checklist ultimately yeah provides a detailed account of the
unit and its accessibility features. And then we can go through our client
database and find the right fit um client for that unit because we have
detailed intake of both the unit and the client. And then once we have identified
a match, we will pass the client information to the housing provider
because that allows them to retain full control over uh selecting their tenant
um and still giving them uh agency in doing that as well. But we do still
support through the application process. And overall, yeah, the tool the
checklist acts as a tool for improving accessibility. I've already found from
doing a few of these checklists in the CRD, uh, completing the checklist allows
myself and the housing provider to have a more detailed conversation about
accessibility. And I learn things based on their experience and they learn
things based on our experience. And I think it uh just creates a good
conversation around what true accessibility looks like within a part
in an apartment or a home. And yeah, we can also work with them to
adapt and modify units. And then hopefully like in the Lower Mainland,
the CRD, we can create a centralized inventory of accessible units for for
wheelchair users
and I'll pass it back to Isabelle. >> Uh thank you, Lind. Yes. So overall
really I mean this the RightFair program is very much a multi-dimensional
uh program, but we we're also looking to really build knowledge uh on accessible
housing. there's a so much different definitions out there and it's an
evolving uh um conversation. So we uh we we feel that beyond matching uh clients
to uh to accessible units, we we feel it's within our mandate to educate
stakeholders on the importance of accessible housing, inclusive design and
the impact. Um, we also want to build awareness and partnerships by really
showcasing the program's benefits and encouraing encouraging collaboration
around the housing sector. Um, promote accessible housing solutions and also
gain insights to inform program improvements. Um, next I I should
mention as well that we as part of our uh learning and and and sharing what
what we um uh the work we do and the gaps in accessible housing and and
informing that conversation. We undertake um a survey of our place
clients. So after a client is placed after 6 months 6 months mark we will go
in and visit them into the home where we've placed them and we will uh uh do
an inerson survey about uh the the impact of the program uh but also we
will uh uh look at better understanding uh whether what what what has changed in
their in their lives after they've been placed. So, has their physical health
improved? Has their sense of independence improved? Um, has their
community integration better? So, we're looking at those key quality of life
indicators, but we're also looking at how well the unit we've been placed them
into is is doing. Are there are they able to now navigate their new home
safely or are do they still have some challenges? And what are those
challenges? And that is incredibly useful information for us because that
ultimately will allow us to take that back to uh the housing sector and
planning departments and and just say hey we we find that all new buildings uh
uh accessible units within those buildings say um half of those don't
have door openers and and we see that as a gap for example. So we can make
further recommendations on on to how to improve accessibility features within uh
within those units and the buildings where we place uh wheelchair users. Uh
next slide. Yes. So I mean that was a bit of a
really short version there of uh everything we do. There's a lot more. So
what I want to say though is that we're we're very excited to finally be
expanding into the CRD. We know there's a huge need there and and we're really
looking forward to to working with with you all in in terms of building our
inventory of accessible and adaptable units uh connecting with um with
organizations and overall really forming uh local uh relationships and
partnerships to to really support wheelchair users uh transition into into
um units that that meet their needs. So, we'll we'll have you have our contact
information there. Um um if you want to learn more, we have a website and uh
social media. We're in the process of updating our website now with all the
information about what we're doing in the CRD. Uh so, I'll stop here and if
you have questions for us, we we'd love to have a conversation.
Thank you very much. >> Thank you.
» Presentation, we're we're thrilled that you've come across the pond to uh
Vancouver Island. That's great. Any questions from committee members?
Councelor O'Keefe. >> Yes. Um, councelor uh, Cherry O'Keefe,
thank you for the presentation. I'm really excited that you're here on the
island. I had talked to um, the folks running your program in Vancouver a
couple years ago and I think we had a discussion at this committee about that
and how we could uh, get an inventory. So, great to have you here. Um, what I'm
wondering is, so in town of Sydney anyways, I'm not sure about other
municipalities, we uh require developers of new buildings to make 20% of the
units adaptable. And the thing that I've kind of
struggled with is that we haven't we they make these adaptable but as you
said uh I don't think very many of them go to people who actually need them. So,
how have have you had any discussion or any ideas about how um we would be
whether it would be you or the town communicating with the the builders of
these new units um to get them into your inventory? Any
ideas how you you might see that working?
It's such a great question and I do remember us connecting um two or three
years ago and having this conversation. Yeah, it was with me. So I'm really
thrilled actually to pursue this conversation because we had such a
productive conversation and you had shared back then with us that you know
exactly what you just said the challenge of of a having these units being built
but having no handle over what what's happening after they being built. Are
they actually going to uh to the people who need them the most? And and this is
really a gap that we're have identified. It's true of the lower mainland as well
is that you know we have these grid units that are coming onto the market
now. Uh but we have no way of knowing whether those units are going to the
people who need them. And as a result, you sort of if they don't, you're sort
of self perpetuating the the problem there because our weight lists of people
waiting for accessible units continue to grow and the accessible units are being
built, but they invariably goes to people who just don't need those
features and and sadly will once they're in the unit, they will actually revert.
they will convert those features into something that fit their needs that are
have nothing to do with accessibility. So um the way to address that I mean of
course I mean our advocacy part is to really would would be great to require
more um accountability [clears throat] on the post occupancy on
the occupancy of these units so that it goes to the people who need that you
know so there's some bit of accountability on on how these units are
being filled but the best way is to work with these housing providers or
developers and and get them to connect with us really and and I don't know I
mean in terms of requirements and whether you're able to require them to
to do this but the the ideal scenario is that they reach out to the right fit and
say okay we have all these units can you help us fill them with with people who
need uh those units and we'll do that we'll do the the matching I mean we'll
we'll help with that um or we can um you can give us a list as well of these
units and who build them and we can um contact the developers the housing
providers ourselves and uh and LIN say will do that she'll she'll go and visit
the units she'll uh she'll take notes of all the accessibility feature or
adaptable features that'll make it to the our inventory and then we can start
the process of matching. So uh so either way it can be uh initiated by the
housing providers themselves or if you give them all the the lists we can uh
initiate contacts ourselves with the housing providers.
Have you had any discussions with the real estate associations or of the urban
development institution or or institute um in ter which represents developers or
or people selling or these kind of units um or rental agencies to
you know have some sort of designation on the listings um for accessibility.
Is that something that's being considered?
» Yes. Yes, we're Yeah, we have had we we've reached out to the U UDI, I think.
Is it? Yeah. The Yeah. And then uh the the real estate association. We we're
look we're we're in the rental market more than um than units that are meant
to be sold. Uh but certainly we uh yeah we we support renters um rather than um
uh people who are looking to to to to purchase units. Uh but yes, we've had
this conversation that's part of the odd ridge. So in Vancouver we have um an
accessible housing coordinator and she'll contact um the all the groups uh
including the the co-ops as well association. We actually did a
presentation in the CRD with a a co-op um a me a group um a number of members
of of co-ops as well to let them know about our program. So we'll really
encourage um all these players, the developers, the housing providers, the
nonprofit association of um housing providers, all of these to to connect
with us and let us know about the units they have um so we can educate them
about that. Yeah, absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you. [clears throat]
And I presume property management companies would be part of that list.
» Absolutely. Yeah. >> Yeah.
» So we're really looking to build those connection in the CR because this is
what we've done in the in the lower mainland but in the CR we're just
building that. So it will be fantastic if you know um uh offline lean sick can
have a further conversation with you on how you can facilitate those those
contacts uh with those developers that do um that are required to build those
uh 20% of adaptable units. So we we get our hands on this unit and can follow
through. [clears throat]
» Councelor Newton, you had a question. >> Uh yeah, thank you chair.
I think you might have answered my question with that last comment, but I
guess um when when the applications come forward
to the municipalities, uh how is it like obviously
they're identified in the building plans when it comes forward for the
application, but is there a flag or something to follow through to that
follow-up about which specific units have the features that are
required and How is that related? I've been super excited about this inventory
being coming on stream for the CRD and you know I know councelor O'Keefe talked
about this before but >> um I guess how how is the follow through
about once communities require accessible or adaptable units how are
they identified and does that then get to you for that information purposes?
» Yeah. Yeah. Well, this is so I guess what you're describing is that when
you're you're doing the application review, if I understand you correctly,
you review this application and then you ask those developers to say 20% of these
units need to be adoptable, right? So, is that what you're you're doing? And
then okay, so what's what's your process? I mean, I'm sorry I'm answering
your question by asking you a question, but how what what happens from that
point? Do you do you just um uh they say okay yeah we'll be the 20%. Do you have
any kind of followup or you have nothing at that point or you just Yeah. How what
happens on your end of things? >> Sure. That's probably a a gap.
» I think I'm gonna throw our director of planning on the spot here and give him a
moment to collect his thought. Uh but it's I should have identified a score
» with the district of central sanage and our requirements are a bit different
than Sydney's but >> we still do have some uh so I guess I'd
be curious about how going forward to identify the specific units within an
application to come forward and then my follow-up question is around the changes
to the VC building code >> um does that improve things to make all
of them accessible or adaptable or not but the first question is just how to
identify once the units are prescribed. Where's the follow through to identify
them >> to the public?
» Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, this is the the gap would been exactly trying to address
in in the lower mainland is that there is this allocated number of units. And
then what we want to do is is really um uh get in touch early on with um the
developer the and then know okay we and get in touch with them directly and then
let us know okay we have these 20 units coming up will you help them fill them
with with um wheelchair users essentially so so we we're getting some
lists from municipalities essentially the individual municipalities
They let us know, okay, we we know we have this developer, we have this
building coming up, this new building. Um we have allocated that many units and
then they pass on the information for the um the contact person essentially
and then we follow up directly with um with the the the the housing
representative there uh and then ask them about their their available units
and then um and then we visit them. sometimes they're still under
construction somehow and then that's when they those units make it to our
inventory. So, so we're we're the ones trying to to get a handle of of those
actual units, know what building which buildings they are, know the square
footage, how many and then um get this information all collected in our
inventory so that we can we can match essentially uh those units to to people
who need them. So uh so essentially it will um uh it'll come but it has to be a
collaboration. So that's why we're doing exactly this presentation today is with
the hope that we can work together and NI will follow up but you you can help
us identify uh these um these projects essentially early on so we can we can
make that happen. >> Okay. So then there's a followup and I'm
going to now go to the director of planning for central Sanch and say is
there a way to liaz with an organization like this about once we get the
application come forward and say we've got you know 32 units or 11 units or
whatever it happens to be um to share that information with as part of sort of
building the inventory. >> Exactly. Yeah. There there there is
certainly that would be we could build that into our um application sort of
completionism. Um one thing we do is we share something
with the CRD. We share a lot of housing data all the CRD. So a CRD could
potentially be an avenue if every municipality has a similar um structure
because they do set housing
and
the thought occurred to me as we're as we're having this conversation. So
everyone is valid in the province housing information to the province. You
have to do your housing targets and reporting that every year our course
council next week >> that would be an ideal avenue if the
province wanted to take a role. But um you take a role and that being a
component of that how many access
the entire profits for this it's not on their radar that's not something they
collect affordable housing supporting number of rental units number of number
of units overall guess the level of bedrooms but it
doesn't touch on adaptability or accessibility
MI could easily be added and wide and very accessible
but that's that's just that thought it's not in place so I think there would need
to be quite a bit of work done individually I think the challenge with
doing it individually though is it's at I guess it is at there's no requirement
for municipalities to report that information right now so the province
could put that in place and second report it differently some could do it
some couldn't so see it be really challenging
um to be comprehensive on it. You might get some municipalities doing it, some
not. So that's a challenge. >> Sure.
» That seems to be something that could be advocated at UBCM for something like
that. But um in the meantime for the local governments and certainly the the
great work that's being done on the peninsula, uh it would be relatively
easy to share that information. And I think your point to the CRD is and we
have a representative um here about that. So to collect that data centrally
and try to minimize like you know maybe all of the work that's done locally but
to to coordinate that centrally at least from the CRD perspective if this is also
a CRD initiative >> that makes the most
» yeah we are um >> we are working or in communication with
the CRD at the moment too to do a similar presentation at their next A uh
meeting which I believe is in the fall. So maybe I'll just make a note to sort
of circle back to that idea when when we do get the chance to speak with their
committee.
» Yeah. I mean to your point to um I mean you were cutting out on that uh previous
uh point uh so I didn't get the full gist but I think there's a point there
for systematic advocacy there you know for sure for having these requirements.
Um right now we um we we really very much
rely on these local collaborations you know. So for Vancouver for the Metro
Vancouver we go to the city of Vancouver we have a partnership where they will
give us the access to this information and so we we we collect the data we meet
with the housing providers we visit the units and we have this inventory. Uh
same we go that for each municipality Richmond Kquidlam and all of this. So
it's really at those individual municipality level and there's no
requirements. Uh but it's much needed to have something more comprehensive
consistent and and I think pro provincewide uh for for have capturing
this data but but I yeah so you noted and I think engaging in systematic
advocacy to make those changes is really needed. So yeah
» Mr. Nukem >> thank you. Um, Cory Nukem, I'm the
director of community planning for the Town Sydney. Um, I was just thinking
about our internal processes.
» Yeah. >> Um, thinking about our internal
processes. So when we get a set of plans that has 20% of the units identified as
adaptable, I mean sometimes they don't and we have to go back to the developer
and inform them that they're missing something, but uh generally we get those
plans, we confirm that it meets the requirements for adaptable housing and
our zoning bylaw and then it goes on process. Um, initially when we get those
plans, quite often the the units have a bit of like an interim
identification like they might just be labeled 1 2 3 4 5 uh or maybe 101 102 or
ABCD. Um later on in the process after the
building has been approved by council, we go through a Canada Post addressing
process that applies the actual unit official unit numbers and address that
Canada Post would use and that the building that itself would use. Um so
unit 101 102 or whatever it might be. There's a bit of a gap because the that
addressing process doesn't happen until much later in the process. And so
getting those numbers correct uh can be a bit tricky sometimes because they do
change between the initial plan submission and the addressing. Um, my
question for you is, does the right fit program have its own form
to collect information on these potential buildings? And is that
something that you could provide to municipalities?
So, you're collecting a standardized set of information that you know works for
you. And again thinking about our own processes, we have uh tasks that we you
know check off as completed in our system and we could potentially make a
task that is you know fill out the right fit information form on the adaptable
units or whatever information you want on the building and send that off to an
email that could include the developer contact info. Um, so you can see what
provided, what the tenure is, whether it's rental or ownership, and then you
could contact that builder directly and say, you know, we've got
» we see you've got these units and it's rental building and we're we're
interested in in matching up before you put it out to market. So, uh, a form
like would be very helpful so that we could sort of rather than guessing at
the information that's required, we could just fill it out, send it off, and
you could add it to your database. So, just a thought there. Thanks. Uh yeah
and thank you for um outlining your process. So just a followup to that is
and I'm mindful of your time. I know you have a lot to discuss on your agenda and
I think almost deserves its own meeting really to really discuss about how how
we can make that work in in practice. Um but so when you you receive this do you
um when you have let's say six units that are adaptable for a specific
building um do you you do you don't collect any further information you have
the addresses and then that's it right that's all there is in your system
essentially at this point right correct >> uh as far as the adaptable information
adaptable unit specific information goes We don't even know right now. We don't
know the units that adaptable units are going to be within the building.
» We just make sure plan for each unit meets the zone by requirement or space
the whatever. >> So we don't we don't actually record
where they are in the building >> where they are in the building. Okay.
Okay. But you know there's a Yeah. Um, and the form that you're thinking
for for the right fit is that um, essentially requiring the the developers
to fill out the the form. So, and then it's added to our inventory. That that's
what you're thinking about, right? >> Uh, yeah. Yeah, I mean I honestly I
think >> municipal might be better positioned to
fill that out because if we're assigning addresses and you want to know what the
official address of that unit is with the building, um asking the developer to
provide that information might be a bit of a tall task and it also doesn't
happen until much later in the process. And also staff, municipal staff are the
ones that coordinate that addressing. So it it might just be easier to have a
planner who's reviewing the file fill that stuff out if it's not too complex.
» Yeah. So right now the way we we we work when we get um word of um a new a new
building or units becoming available um early on uh our accessibility um
coordinator will will make contact um with the developer and then we'll go do
an site a site visit an actual uh in-person site visit uh with a
standardized uh accessibility checklist essentially. So, so this is something
that we we fill out uh and we sort of um we have measured the like Alin say
mentioned the turning radius and all these things. So, it's it's gives us a
really a good um detailed information of what what this unit has to offer and
this this is where it makes it to our inventory. So, so ideally, uh, we we
would want those developers to, um, to be, you know, as part of your process to
be required to, um, to essentially make contact with us or and so and to be open
to having us visit the unit and record all that information. Is that is that
something that we could do perhaps, you think?
» Well, we could certainly provide you with the developers contact. Sure.
Um and then we can circle back and give you access. One of the thing we want to
do is right now the our inventory of units is uh is really in nature more
internal. It allows us to match clients according to their preferences and
number of criteria but eventually we'd want to add a functionality which allows
to provide reports of all the accessibility features of the units and
what what we're discovering. So uh um so and share that back with the
municipalities and on on the building information and all that. So um so yeah
» u got a couple more questions from the community. So if we can go to those.
» Yeah. No [laughter] lots of question. >> Hi I'm Charlene. I'm member of the
committee. Uh I don't know whether this is you're talking about rental units. Is
there any way of of having um like private homes that may be rental homes
in there? Because one of the things I've come up against with people that I know
is a lot of these adaptable units that are being planned in in uh apartment
buildings or condos, they typically are one-bedroom
places. So, they they accommodate one person. Um people with disabilities have
families, so they sometimes live in an apartment building. They want a home.
want a suite. Is there any way of inventorying or or does this just become
too cumbersome to to say we want um some people want homes, they don't
necessarily want um condominiums or any is there any any recourse on that?
» Um rental. Oh, that is such a great question. I love it. Um thank you for
absolutely one of the thing we find is that we have will you're so right in
saying wheelchair users have uh families and don't just require onebedroom unit.
This is one of our points of ad systematic uh advocacy is that we find
in those um uh buildings, new buildings, there's an disproportionate number of
one-bedroom accessible units which means that we're unable to place um wheelchair
users with family and household size where they have two, three, four
children and they require twobedroom, threebedroom, fourbedroom. Sometimes
they maybe one person or two people they require two-bedroom unit to to have a
living caregiver all sorts of things situations. So larger units is
definitely something we're we're after. And in terms of housing type, um,
interestingly enough, a lot what we found from our surveys is a lot of our
wheelchair users, uh, that we place, they were previously coming from
nonaccessible homes with stairs and everything, but
they were often like single family housing, basement suites, um, and then
we move them into this um, high-rise building. Uh, but it's it not doesn't
always work. And so we're really looking to include and diversify the the housing
types that that we have. So we'd be definitely looking at rental homes or
garden suites or um private owners wanting to rent out an adapt something
that they've retrofitted to make it adaptable. Um absolutely. So uh is there
it's it's not easy to identify that supply to be honest. Uh but if there's
any way to work together to add that that would be very helpful because we we
know that by doing this we'll be able to find units that are larger in size and
also we'll in terms of the housing type that will perhaps match better what what
our clients want actually in terms of living situations.
» Thank you. >> Hey councelor O'Keefe.
» Um so just a couple on this last topic. So in terms of number of onebedroom, two
bedrooms, three bedrooms, that's something within the municipality's
perview that we can uh we we can do that. So um we can we we say that they
have to provide 20% and we could say that that 20% has to be allocated
equally or on a prata basis one, two and threebedroom units. So, um, but in the
interest of moving this along, I know we we could spend a lot of time on this,
um, that I would I'm going to try a motion here, um, which is that, uh, the
committee recommends that the three the planning departments of the three
municipalities work together
to develop a process to identify adaptable and accessible
units to forward to the right fit program.
» Great. >> Uh yeah, I'll second. I was just saying
» Oh, okay. >> I'll second
» and I looking to our our planning folks. Uh just kind of listening to some of I
think what Mr. Nukem was saying in terms of what I would just see the simplest
process possible would be we would could perhaps add a step into our process. um
where we give the developer the contact information to the right fit people and
say we'd like you as part of the process to contact them and and uh tell them
about your adaptable units and kind of like hand it off to them rather than
staff having to have any significant role in that. So
if that's if if you think that makes sense or if you think that um uh
» yeah I mean uh it could go either way. We could provide uh the developer
contact info to right fit right contact info to the developer. I would think the
former would probably be more successful.
Yeah. >> Busy. So,
» okay. >> I guess it gives you both.
» Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. So,
» can I ask a quick Can I ask a quick question? Sorry to interrupt.
» Sorry.
» Sorry. Question. >> Yeah. And then I think we've talked a
lot about the rental side of it, but I think this is also like the market side
of it. And so I'm assuming when this would come forward and for consideration
that it would be for any sort of applicant that would whether it's a a
car or >> multif family or a town home that
whatever component is required whether it's rental or that this is what would
be reported out on so that it >> in in Sydney's case we only require
adaptable units on uh multi-unit residential buildings so like carriage
homes don't they're not to provide those
features. Uh that's something we could consider in the future, but in Sydney's
case, >> the code's the same. It only applies to
those larger multif family buildings, not not individual units like a
» right. >> But if it was a development that came
forward and I could think of one in central Sanage where there was one like
a single family that was required to have I think
moment but for market that that could be identified in the future.
» Okay. What sort of council through a variance process requires some adaptable
future? >> Yeah, sure. And I would echo councelor
O'Keefe's comment that this hopefully is not a main work project for staff and I
think hearing from the two individuals that this is relatively simple, but I'm
trying to download this onto municipal staff is not really what I'm interested
in doing. >> Yeah, same.
» It's not it's it's more of a systems advice than just value.
I I do believe that absolutely what I mentioned earlier having it at the
provincial level is the best case scenario because it's a requirement
right so it's it's just the longevity of it system
» a robust system in place is it going to continue that way that's that's the
challenge unless it's required legislation by law it's required
okay any other discussion on the motion
If not, um, entertain a a vote then. All in favor of the motion.
Carried. So, do you have one more comment before
you go, Isabelle? >> Oh, yeah. The the question and thank you
for for supporting this and this very incredibly useful conversation and also
thoughtful questions. Really appreciate it and very inspired by the level of
interest. So, thank you for for having us and uh giving this opportunity to
work together. So, two quick questions. I'm I'm just curious about the makeup on
the onebedroom, two bedroom, threebedroom in your 20% allocation. Do
you actually go to the level of Yeah, >> I think the the we've we forwarded the
motion. I think if there's specific questions on the I think getting into
those details, we could discuss when our staff get the opportunity to this.
» Sure. Yeah. because I got a number of questions on on you know allocation and
things like that but I agree and so would that be okay for us to to to
contact you back and then have this maybe a separate conversation because I
think we'll need to do that >> based program be more fully developed
later on we certainly invite you back u you know when you've got that ready to
go >> okay perfect
» thank you and yeah please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions Z
want to just set up a time to chat. >> Great.
» Thank you. >> Okay, next item on the agenda is
accessibility plan. Has there been any uh changes to anybody's accessibility
plans since last meeting? Seeing none,
um council referrals.
I don't see anything specific under there. No.
Council [clears throat] updates. uh the tracking sheet
I think. Um yes, councelor O'Keefe. >> Oh, I have some updates from Sydney. Um
so on the the tracking sheet talks about recommendations that have been put
forward. So just some of the things that's being dealt with. Um there was
the um the committee had a resolution about tactile markings at the at
intersections and um staff So we brought that to to staff's attention and they
note that they do conform to the master municipal construction documents for
tactile markings and they could provide a copy of that just back if we wish. Um,
subsequent to that, in regard to the tactile markings at Beacon and Highway
17, which was discussed at the committee, council made a resolution to
send a letter to the Ministry of Transportation and Transit expressing
concern about the misalignment of the tactile markings. That was sent about I
think a month ago and we still have had not any response. However, I understand
from the community member who brought that forward that MOOTT is coming out in
August 6th um to review the intersection in more detail with a representative
from the CNIB. So, we hope to hear more after that. Um, in regards to the
recommendation about the municipalities um, communicating to the airport
authority about accessibility concerns, um, I think there's a letter you can see
in the agenda package. So, um, that's been covered off as well. Um, accessible
parking awareness. uh we asked our staff to highlight an information campaign
onto the business community regarding best practices for accessible parking.
So that will happen in November. And then I'll just also report that on
Canada Days um in response to recommendations by this committee uh the
uh viewing areas for the fireworks [clears throat] and the Canada Day
parade were expanded accessible viewing areas and additional parking um as as
well. So I think that all went well, but if there's members of the committee who
participated in Canada Day in Sydney and used those accessible uh areas, um we'd
be receptive to comments on that. >> Charlene, did you have a
» Yeah, I just wanted to say I I didn't attend the events. I broke my leg so I
did not go anywhere. Um, but I have heard from multiple community people
that they were extremely pleased with the ex extra accessible viewing uh the
accessible parking. I've talked to many people who are thrilled about the
accessible parking spot that was added by the the band shell down there. Like
so I'm getting I'm starting to get a lot of feedback from other community members
coming to me. They're noticing the the differences and the changes and they're
they're really pleased with it. Um, Gar Homer is bringing people down regularly.
Um, so I just want to say kudos to to Sydney. Like it's it is being noticed.
So, and I'm planning on coming to some of the Central Sanage stuff this summer.
So, I'm checking it out too. >> Anyways, so thank you.
» It's coming up pretty fast. >> Yeah.
» Which is a nice segue. Councelor Newton, do you have anything from Central Sage
» specific on the the tracking sheet? No. They'll say that
wasn't a council or anything. So, uh I'll take this
opportunity then for the chair to briefly say central Sanage's 75th
celebration this weekend. Hopefully, we do a good job from an
accessibility standpoint. It will be a very busy weekend. It will be a lot of
fun. Um and uh yeah, I look forward to seeing people out walking, rolling,
striding uh into the community. So >> I did notice that their their form out
there says that the shuttle bus is accessible.
» Good. >> So so that the we're getting out there
like this is becoming standard to to put this stuff out there and let us be aware
of it. So yeah, great. >> Look forward to feedback.
» Pastor Batista, anything from North Sanash? I know you've been busy with
other things out there. >> Uh yeah, you know, we've been busy with
other things. um our zoning bylaws a little bit longer. So when it comes to
some of those components
later in the fall
is off
but um I know it's on later the agenda some
comments about that. Okay, great. >> Thank you. And that's a good point you
made about no council report. I wonder if I don't even understand
[clears throat] what council referrals means. Is that the opportunity when
council should be reporting or is it just poorly worded? Should we change it?
» No, that would have been I didn't mean to jump in, but I think anything that
came from the three councils as a referral to the
» Oh, I see. >> Shouldn't we regularly have a
opportunity for a council report though? Well, that's kind of what I saw number
seven as like council updates. Oh, >> including tracking,
» but but council referral would be something specific.
» Okay. >> So, if council said we we want the
committee to review the new active transportation plan, that would be a a
specific sort of item that council asks the committee.
» Good. I'll be up up to speed just about the time I get ready to kick get kicked
out of here. [laughter] Okay. Um, anything else on the tracking
sheet? I think we covered them all. Uh, right program we did uh Wayne Road
Park update. Um, Mr. Martin, you just want to go
ahead and cover that off or >> Yeah, I'd love to. Hi everybody. Um, Ben
Martin, director of construction North Sanage. Apologize if I haven't said hi
to some new faces. Um >> oh this do I need a speaker? Is there a
speaker? >> You need to pass some time back.
» Um so I've thanks Charlene for the um request.
» Um I did provide this email summary that I see on the agenda.
» Um so what does everybody know about Wayne Park the process? Did everybody go
through the web page and does everybody understand how we got to where we are?
» I did. >> I went through it.
» I drove out there and had a look. >> It's good. There's some relevance with
that. So, we did have a quite a robust process and we um we were at the initial
stages of reporting back a collection of interests in the park. That was at the
council meeting that was referenced in the email. And at that council meeting,
uh council gave direction to simply proceed with that. the entire collection
and to initiate it by May 2026 >> um in short order a certain section.
So staff [snorts] um as you can for those of you who have gone to the park,
you'll see a large concrete foundation [clears throat] and a steel structure
off to the side for for a gathering place
and staff will uh due to cost capacity and or due to labor capacity and costs,
staff will be um completing the re the remainder of the section identified on
the project page in the fall after our growing season.
Um I did I did provide one error in my email about the paving lot for the
parking lot. Um the plan as accepted by council did indicate that um future
parking lot improvements will be provided. So I did speak with our
utilities public works staff and we are it's now going to be paved where I
indicated it's not going to be paid. There'll be a pathway to gathering place
structure. It was a real problem for me. >> Yeah, me too.
» So >> instead of a community gathering place,
if you can't >> can't gather.
» Yeah, considering >> it's actually one of our community
parks. So before the peninsula soccer happened at Memorial Park, that was
actually quite a node for the [clears throat] community. We had
» two baseball fields, >> baseball diamonds.
» We we actually bought an adjacent property, unknown to most people, bought
a decent property because we thought we'd had more of that coming. This is
well before my time. Um, so we thought we'd have to expand
tennis facilities and whatnot. And since that time, it's really transitioned. So,
it is still a community park, but it's really more of a neighborhood. However,
with this new vision, it's turning back into a community park. So, there's going
to be so many amenities there because council approved all all the options.
So, we're going to have uh a trail connector small like a younger age kids
natural play structure >> water feature a water sorry a water
feature a water misser um the gathering place uh we're going to
place about 20 plus trees in that area around gathering place to make it more
I suppose kind of a disc golf um so it will be place where families
will come and [clears throat] there'll be something for everybody. And so, um,
we'll pave the the parking lot is as per direction
yesterday, the parking lot. It's planned to be paved with
» That's fantastic. >> Charlene,
» yeah, I've got questions. So, my my concern with this is that it's going to
be an area for everybody. Um, without going into the detail and coming
to us, will there be picnic tables that are accessible to everybody?
Um, will there be parts of this part as we go on that will be accessible to
everybody? Like, are we are we paying attention to what the pathways are made
of? Are we paying attention to um how how do I get to that picnic table? Um,
and and I bring this up in in some respect because of my disappointment
with Wolf Orchard. Um, I checked it out and there's a lovely little picnic table
and there's a lovely little bench on cement pads that is not accessible to
somebody in a wheelchair. So, it broke my heart thinking of the the kids that
go to Deep Coast School because I know this was done in conjunction to be part
of the school being able to access it. There's absolutely no access for a a
child in a wheelchair to be able to sit at a picnic table or sit next to
somebody on a bench. So, I just want to make sure that these things are not
forgotten as we go forward. Um that that we do pay attention to the detail in
these parks cuz like I say, I was I was pretty disappointed in seeing that. And
um without it coming again, this this is what we're we're going to make this
we're going to make it a a a play area, but are these areas going to consider
accessibility? So that that was my concern in asking questions about this
is uh you know I I don't want to see it go to the level that it's completed and
it's like oh we didn't make it accessible because we missed we missed
an opportunity here. So I just hope along the way I mean I can I I follow
council meetings as best as I can. I read what's going on as best as I can.
But um as as it's been pointed out to me before that sometimes when you see these
plans that come up, they're placekeepers. They're they're
abstract plans, but it is in the details that things get missed. So I just want
to make sure that that is is considered going forward on this
» interesting discussion. Maybe you can discuss how that can be considered.
» Yeah. and >> and and provide other incentives to the
council motion that provided direction for staff.
» Yeah, I mean the council motion itself I was pretty rush and and was not
anticipated to happen the way it did. That's at least my perspective. Um, you
know, my only real comment is I'm quite thankful to our staff that they're
always thinking about that stuff and they're always considering it and and
this was one of those pivots that happened um partly because these
communications that happened, but um yeah, the you know, the way I saw this
originally playing out after this presentation was that it was going to be
coming to SP. These were the things that were going to be happening. Um you know,
the the council decision is what it is. I certainly can't unwind
those things now. Um, but yeah, I'm I'm personally trying to be much more on top
of making sure our council is considering those things before they
rush decisions because that's what happened to me.
» Yeah, >> I took a screenshot of what you had on
the website. looked [clears throat] to me that if the parking lot got paved,
there would be accessibility to the trail and the community gathering place
» um over the uh trail service that you're providing, which is pretty standard
stuff, I think. Compacted gravel is relatively firm and wheelchair
accessible, right? >> Compacted fines. So, it's like a gravel
base with compact six mill fines. That's what that's what's intended in design in
the plan. The trail network. Yeah, I think that's what we see elsewhere in
the peninsula, don't we? >> I'm not familiar with the terms. So, to
me, all I need to know is it wheelchair accessible. Can a person in a wheelchair
or a walker easily traverse the surface? Yes or no?
» I would say that a compact, for those of you who've been around trails, it's a
CRD standard. I believe it's a central standard. It's quite a a compacted
surface and it's crowned supposed to be crowned to to shed. Um,
it's I would say it's better than loose gravel. It's better than beach. It's not
as good as ashalt for like a wheel surface. Like you couldn't run a scooter
down it, but you could run a larger a larger wheeled.
» Uh, councelor Newton I think was an accident. Councelor Keith.
» Thank you. Um,
weighing in and other people's jurisdictions. The only comment I'll
have is previous member many you know commented
about how good the gravel surface trail was that
central sage had along ste and again like you chair I'm not
familiar with this but a six mill aggregate is that's the standard then
that's great I would yeah for whatever voice this committee has to say that you
know at minimum so that that is able to be
I think is essential. I'll leave it at that.
» That's O'Keefe. >> Uh thanks. So I think the thought the
way I thought things were going in the municipalities is that when things were
being considered like you know this that the first thing would be come to spec
and like for example I really appreciated like central central Sanage
when they were doing their they're redoing their parks and so they came to
the committee first of all and said hey we're doing our big parks
uh you know thing and we want to get some general comments on things we we we
need to think about and then the commitment from them that they will come
back every time that they're looking at a park to say this is what we plan for
the park you know same with Sydney when we did our active transportation plan
there was certainly a lot of community engagement on that and there's lots of
opportunities to participate but the the point of spa is that councils and staff
make a concerted effort not to just depend on that general sort of
engagement, but that we we we factor into our engagement process reaching out
to spat specifically. So, and what I'm hearing from a couple members here is
that, you know, maybe more could have been done that way and and hearing from
councelor De Batista, um, you know, he thought it was coming just back. In
staff's defense, you know, staff, you know, presents something and unless
council directs them to do anything else, they're going to go and and do
whatever sta or council directs them to do. So I, you know, if committee members
thought that they want to have a better look at this plan, you have the option
to make a recommendation to North Sanage Council that the plans for Wayne Road
Park be presented to SPAC for review and comment. Um, and so then you could make
whatever formal suggestions you have that could go back. And sometimes
there's cost implications, you know, and in defense of staff, you know, uh
whether it's a gravel trail or or whatever or there's no accessible
playground features, those are things that cost a lot more money.
» And so um you know, staff are always looking at what's the most cost
effective way of doing things. But if the committee puts forward certain
things, they say this is important and then staff can say, "Well, we could do
that, but it's going to cost an extra $100,000." And that's what happened in
Sydney with Breather Park. Um, is that initially there wasn't going to be a lot
of accessibility there. And the committee said, "No, we want that." And
so it ended up costing I think it was another $100,000
to include uh the the the playground surface and some other things. But at
least it gives council >> for your donation.
» At least it gives council the the opportunity to uh you know weigh in on
that. So that's an option you have if you want to make a motion to North
Stanage to um you know ask staff to review the the the plans with SPAC and
ask for their review. >> I think we have I think we have time now
right just to the point that's actually what happened with Jubilee Park prior to
Breath of Park. >> Right.
» Right. That's exactly how that played out. um this did not play out that way
and I'll keep my personal comments rationale for that probably to myself to
say >> and basically we want to be partners not
policemen right >> yeah and so it was uh yeah there was
certain motivations for this to be rushed the way it was so it's
» highly unfortunate um that it played out this way because it didn't previously
» so it seems like there's time to bring it back one more time before you get
» blind in the call no >> well
I mean It's it it's already been approved by council
» as is. >> So yeah, a portion is being completed as
per the image on the page. >> The remainder of the park staff couldn't
conceivably completed the top.
» So there's a structure going, trees being planted and the parking lot being
paved, some split rail fencing, irrigation for the trees, and the start
of that trail network. If there's um a motion from this committee to consider
paving the trail, start adding or consider coming back the the remainder
of the park will be constructed 2027. That's in the capital fund. So
there is an opportunity to bring you know obviously
what's already set set in motion is is is happening. But there's nothing to say
that uh we couldn't come back and say okay 2027 remainder of the parks being
done. >> Um we're interested in these some
additional features >> also always have opportunity to revisit
past decisions if they so choose as well.
» Do you want to make a motion sir? So yeah, I think we make a motion to have
uh the next planning phase of of Wayne Road to be presented to SPAC
» might be assuming that it makes it into the capital list. Sometimes things are
moved if the cap if it remains in the capital plan for 2027 and it should then
it would come before this committee >> first.
» So >> so I think the motion
» is there you're waiting to say something >> there's a motion on the floor. as well.
Sorry. >> And just just to help out, I think the
recommendation would be that SPACK recommends the district
present to SPACK um the remainder of the work plan for balance works be done away
at a future meeting and I think that's the opportunity to you know provide some
input and provide some thought because that the rest of that work isn't going
to be done yet and it gives them an opportunity to come back albeit the
first half is a little too late. Um, but at least the second
» you okay with that wording? >> Yeah, I'm okay with that wording. Did
you catch that for me?
» Anybody on u anybody attending virtually?
» We need a seconder, right? Or do we have one? We need a seconder, I think.
» Can I second? >> Okay. Yeah, I'll second it. Well, I I
was just hoping with some words. >> Okay. So, I'm I'm Okay. So, I'm doing
» I'll happily second. >> Okay. Yeah.
» Okay. Great. >> Thank you.
» Multiple sectors. Um any discussion um from all you quiet folks on the on the
screen there that I'm looking at? >> Janelle and company.
» Nope. >> No. I I just really appreciate this and
I'll just make a comment. I appreciate Charlene bringing up about children uh
because this is one thing that it's difficult for our family is we see
accessible places for children but that doesn't mean that the activities that
are included are accessible. So I appreciate opportunity to hear this and
yeah >> counc
and you know it's an opportunity for you
know the member of council that's going to bring this motion forward to their
council to as just a reminder of maybe previous process you know your normal
process of what you did at Jubilee Park which seemed to be really good and I
think what the committee members of the committee were pointing
out today is disappointment that there wasn't that uh consultation
for Wayne Road Park um as there had been in the past though
and councelor Newton then I think we should bring the questions
she was still around the process on this about how so I
um weighing into each local government's
sort of governance and their processes. I struggle with this being outside. I
appreciate the advocacy side of what this committee is, you know, jumping up
and down and doing um how this is coming. I mean through the process I
struggle with a little bit just from what's involved.
I absolutely agree that this should have come forward as council efforts. You
know what you guys did in Jubilee Park was great.
» Yeah. I I >> Do you have another suggestion on how we
can uh get it on board? >> No, I don't have another suggestion
because I think this committee should review it, but I just my problem is with
how it how it's coming back forward through the process.
» Yeah, understood. Okay, I'll call the question. All in
favor of the motion. Uh
» against period.
» Thanks guys. >> Thank you for your help with that.
» Can I just say >> yes?
» Is it Are we able to do the accessible parking before Ben goes?
» Oh, just because Yeah,
» sure. >> That's okay with you.
» Yes. >> Or I mean, sorry, I was going to say
that there's a reason for my departure. I'd love to stay. I've got
» if the accessible park is related to bylaw, so I'll be able to
» Okay. >> Okay.
» Off you go. It's nice to see everybody. >> Thank you, too.
» Okay. Accessibility at Mary Whitespear Center.
» Yes, that's coming to me again. Um quite some time ago it it was brought up that
Mary Windspar would like uh input from the committee on accessibility issues at
Mary Windsor. Somehow that got dropped and nothing ever happened. Um I have
been talking with Denny Warner from Mary Winspair and she's very interested in
our committee um helping with any kind of accessibility
um information notes. Um she did say um this didn't print out very well that she
was um looking for some uh assistance regarding accessibility for the center
um accessibility with washrooms, signage, parking or any other um sensory
issues, any kind of issues that we could do. um she was not able to make this
meeting today, but wanted to know if our committee would be um in a position that
we could maybe help out, do an audit, meet with her, whatever. And I just
wanted to I I certainly have got my ideas of what I'd like to see at Mary
laughing at me because he can figure those out. Um, but I think we all bring
our our expertise on this committee to that and to see uh Mary Winspair and the
community tackle some of these accessibility issues. So, I just wanted
to know whether that's something that other members of the committee would be
willing to to work on with us. >> Certainly, I would. I I know I certif.
» So I my suggestion would be to for Miss Warner to make a formal request to SP
back either you know to appear um at at a meeting in the future. she wasn't
available today. Um, you know, to to, you know, maybe send some questions in
advance or if she's looking for an on-site sort of thing to send, you know,
a formal request to SPAC outlining what are the things they want feedback on and
then SPAC can respond at that time. >> Okay. Are you comfortable writing that?
» Yeah. So would that would the formal request come to SPACK or does it have to
go through council to come to SPACK process?
» I want to know what the process is. >> I think that's where we have a gray area
what this committee's role is and without a doubt
» providing some guidance and input. Um, but I be curious what our terms of
reference state about who we can invite in to request input from uh from the
wealth of knowledge in this room about how that works. And not to say that I
don't think that there's some great input that could be provided, but it's
just um I think this role the committee is still from the local government side
of things on how that comes forward. Keep
» I guess what what I would say I think the terms of reference talk about you
know education sort of of the broader community certainly there's a role in
providing direct um feedback to the local governments but I'm recollecting
although I can't remember who other organizations that have come here for
feedback on different uh different things that haven't necessarily gone
through our ours. >> Yeah. The airport and the panorama.
» Oh, yeah. Right. Yeah. So, >> peninsula f festivities.
» Oh, yeah. Peninsula celebrations. Um, you know, they're a community group that
provides >> maybe I'll have to refer refresh my
memory about make sure that
» that Yeah, that's fine. Well, and that was my question with this. Is is this
something that comes formally to us or do we just individually say, "Okay,
we're we're meeting with you, Denny." >> Oh, well, that's another way of
» of doing it. Al although I think I think it would be good to have kind of an
official spa uh presence because Sydney and North
Sanage anyways contribute significantly to Mary Winspear Center and I think we
have kind of a real interest I would think of ensuring that the municipal
facilities that we we support financially
um you know that there's some concern about accessibility there and it would
be of interest. >> Plus, we have a breadth of experience on
the committee that would be different than just Charlene and I going for
example. We want to consider all of the u
the whole community not just the mobility challenge community.
So looking at this from the reference does say that uh committee identified
barriers for persons with disabilities in the community and recommends
solutions for consideration by the San Mins local governments as well as
sharing committees and organizations.
So, um [clears throat] maybe we can co-write a letter, send it off, and
we'll get some feedback. >> Okay.
» Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay, that works. Thank you.
» All right. Now, we're on to um item D. Sydney wave f wayfinding markings. We
talked about this a couple of meetings ago, and I think uh Mr. Wellland was
kind enough to offer his observations. So, thank you.
Yeah, go ahead.
Uh yeah, thank you. Uh all right. So the uh
I've used the term wayfinding and and in other conversations people have talked
about tactile markings. Um they're the same thing. Um
and uh whether that whether the tactile feature be grooves in the concrete or uh
twizzies. Um that's that's really what I was looking
at. And so um I I uh conducted an audit um between
April 25th and May 7th of this year. Um
both uh
on my own and uh with my partner who is uh totally blind. Um
and uh what we did is uh took kind of a grid approach and went from um Highway
17 and Beacon Avenue um all the way over to uh First Street
and the waterfront uh the pier um from Beavenon
Beacon uh James White and uh Sydney
Um and then went a little bit beyond that to Henry Avenue as well. Uh and
also to Mill Road and Rest Haven. Um
so uh I I made notes of uh what I was
seeing there and I also took photographs of uh many of the the features um on the
on the concrete. Um so the briefly the findings were um that
uh so in terms of the way that I I did this I I looked at a corner as being
four corners right so an intersection has four corners so I looked at what's
going on in the northeast the northwest southeast southwest whatever um and so
in terms of the the numbering that's that's where that's coming from So there
are 54 corners in that grid that I just described that
have no markings at all. Um anywhere that there's cobblestone, at
least that's what I'm calling it, the cobblestones, uh there are no marks of
any sort.
Um the other feature that I notice is that where there are grooves in the
concrete that are meant to be um tactile markings,
uh there is little consistency in the way that those markings are
displayed. So I found that there were 20 corners where the grooves parallel the
road and there are 19 corners where it's the opposite way.
There are also at least five corners uh which are newer and uh have grooves at
right angles, right?
And so,
excuse me just a moment.
Yeah. Uh, so one of the features that I noticed uh was that there are corners
where uh there are maybe three sections to
grooves. Uh so that there is a a a section that
has grooves that are um parallel to to say the this road u the one that's going
north north south and then grooves that are parallel to the uh east west road
but then there's another set that are in between that.
So although we have
Sydney Council who have uh you know reached out to the Ministry of
Transportation uh with concerns about the Highway 17
and Beacon Avenue intersection where these uh grooves and Twizzies are
misaligned. Uh, Sydney has its own problems
in the sense that wherever these arcs or um three section grooves are, you have
the potential to lead someone who is blind right into the middle of traffic
going basically kitty corner. Um, so
although I agree that the Ministry of Transportation needs to get its act
together, so does Sydney. Um, the only corners with twizzies,
which are the tactile markings, the yellow plastic ones,
um, is at that Highway 17 and Beacon intersection. I'm not saying that's the
only ones. That's not necessarily the only ones in all of Sydney, but within
the large grid that I talked about, there are no other ones.
Um, the other thing about those twizzies is
that they're not directional twizzies. They're only warning twizzies.
So they can't necessarily uh direct the user in any particular direction. Uh the
grooves can. Um and what I discovered as a cited person is that it's very easy to
uh to to basically as a sighted person to kind
of line up the grooves. If you're looking at the ones that are going to um
uh be parallel to the walkway, to the crosswalk lines,
uh you can basically line those up by your eye and go, "Oh, yeah, okay, that
works." But the problem is that if you're blind, you're not using your eyes
to line up to crosswalk. You're going by whatever direction those those grooves
are are directing you. uh to to basically for for you to they're
directing you to go in a certain direction. Um and
» [clears throat] >> uh and as I've said in some cases that
is directing person into the flow of traffic. Um the other thing that I
noticed is that both the on and off ramps to Highway 17
uh have crosswalks. Um
but there's no uh there's no control of of traffic there. Uh so somebody who's
blind who goes wants to go across this let's say the offramp
um they are not going to be able to know
whether there's traffic coming uh to go on the beacon.
Um the other thing is that that is also true of all of the crosswalks that are
on Beacon that go across Beacon. Uh there's no traffic control there.
There's no um and and in addition there are no markings um for those particular
crosswalks and the same is true of the traffic circle at uh first and beacon.
There were no markings and there's no traffic control there.
Um,
now when you look at uh oh um yeah, let me say this first. Uh when you look at
the uh two traffic control uh crosswalks that I looked at, um
they have warning lights for traffic, but they don't have sound.
So the one that's most concerning, I think, is the one at Mill Road and Rest
Haven, where it's just south of that intersection. Uh so it's at the Shaw
Center.
Um
the other thing about that particular crosswalk is that
the traffic does not always heed the um crosswalk warning lights. Um, this has
been reported to me, but I also observed it when I was doing my audit and
standing there. Um, there were a number of vehicles that just went right through
there. Um, and that's particularly concerning.
Uh, another feature that I looked at was the directional posts on Beacon Avenue.
These are the ones that um direct people to where businesses are.
Uh none of those posts are accessible to the blind or people with low vision. Uh
what they would probably need is raised lettering and braille. They have none.
Um, I also looked at access through glass beach
which is not particularly accessible to blind for people with low. In fact, it
could be potentially quite dangerous for them. Um there are railings that go down
the stairs that
there is a concrete platform at the end of those stairs with no railing. So if
person who's blind was able to manage to get down that far, they would quite
easily walk off of the concrete and onto the rocks or the sand.
Um and that goes a little bit beyond you know, it might need markings, but um
in terms of the railings and such. Um but there also are no
tactile markings anywhere around those stairs to warn someone that there are
indeed stairs there.
And uh I think that's about it. >> Great. Thanks very much. That was a
pretty comprehensive tour around Sydney. Um,
any questions of Mr. Willen? >> Charlie,
» I just thanks for doing that, Richard. I I've certainly since being on this
committee and having had Vanessa on the committee, I've paid more attention to
to crosswalks than ever I did because I only looked at could I get on them with
my wheelchair and now I'm looking at them in a whole different light. like
when so those rounded ones that you're talking about that sends them into any
any direction >> they work great for me but they are a
nightmare for a low vision and blind person um and and I bring this up
because you did a a great comprehensive study of Sydney um North Sanage is
looking at uh I know they brought up redoing uh the walkway along uh East
Sanich Road between McTavish and the roundabout at the airport. Um, and they
also put in a crosswalk on the top of Dean Park Road and they put one of those
cord corners in. It's a nightmare for a low vision person. Um, so again, I think
it's it's that we start paying attention as we're we're we're doing some of these
changes and developments that there's got to be more consistency and in how
we're doing it. And um so I am I am now finding that I'm driving around looking
at crosswalks and and curb cuts and and you're right there's and this this is
part of progressing as we learn more and do more um that we're we are getting
better with directional ones. So I think we need to to find a consistency so that
people know and again as a tri municipal committee
and and I'm I'm somebody who very rarely leaves the peninsula. So to have a
standard that works central Sanage, North Sanage and Sydney so that we have
got a a standard um just makes it easier for everybody who's trying to to
navigate their world. Um, so thank you for doing all of that. I It's something
I've been paying more attention to as well.
» Yes, you're new. Yeah, certainly. I think all of these students
known about where their deficiencies are from work is fully done. I think going
forward is what we're really trying to look at. So I guess my question
the controlled intersections whether it's walk signals or crosswalks do we
have focus probably the wrong persons are here with
engineering but is there like a difference between a controlled signal
and then a signal with the auditory component to it that would be a standard
to use when we look at going forward but there cost perspective
probably much different. >> Yeah, [clears throat]
» picking up on that theme, if you don't mind. Um, so the ones that were rec more
recently done at Sydney, it's a new standard, I presume. Um they as a as a
lay person, they seem to be appropriately done with the markings
heading into the crosswalk. Uh irregardless of the the [clears throat]
controlled crossing, they seem to be uh appropriate because I think I think what
happens is you're supposed to be able to put your cane in the groove and and
follow that groove to the path of travel, right?
» That was that's my impression as to the way it's supposed to work. Um there are
certainly uh problems inherent in that in that system which I'd be happy to
talk about. Um I I think um for a a cane user who is not used to that uh and
particularly if you're using your cane uh and going about Sydney.
» Yeah. Right. and running into the inconsistencies.
Um you you then I think become unclear as to what you know which direction am I
supposed to be following here. Um but I think from a [clears throat] structural
point of view the problem with the grooving in the sidewalks is um that
they they fill with debris. Um, they also are more
expensive, I would think, to change. Uh, whereas if you put down the Twizzy,
you can unscrew it and move it somewhere else or rearrange it or whatever. Um,
you can't do that with concrete grooves. You have to break up the concrete and
redo the whole thing. That's got to be more costly.
And it said if the grooves are filling with debris then then they lose their
their use. That's
» key. Uh thank you. Um I'm also thinking about you know how how we move forward
on this. I mean I know it's something that's come up in the past. Um,
but what I don't know is whether there's a plan to address these things. Like for
example, I know that we, you know, when Vanessa was here, we had discussions
about the scoring lines and that and that's and initially staff's response
was there's a standard that we follow. um what we ended up finding out is that
yeah, there's a standard, but how it was actually being constructed was being
misunderstood. And so I think there is now that
understanding. And so the ones the intersections on Beacon, the new ones
that they've done, all seem good, but there's these ones throughout the
community that are and I see them. You know, there's a lot of them and I don't
know whether staff are aware of those and I don't know
that there's a plan to correct those. So,
» I'm also interested in Charlene's comment about standardization because I
know that Central Sanders is going to make a heck of a lot of improvements to
along Mount Newton, etc. And they'll want to be incorporating some of those
ideas, I'm sure. >> Yeah. Well, and from what I understand
previously from staff is there there is that municipal standard for
accessibility that they follow. But you know where we sometimes miss the mark
and that's where they missed the mark with Ministry of Transportation is that
you know you get contractors in to do the work that don't necessarily are very
familiar with it and so they don't implement the standard accurately. So,
what I'm I guess what I'm struggling with is
you know how we whether there's a way to return to uh you know put all of what
you've got there into like a kind of a report or in writing with the pictures
so that we could whether that would be useful for staff
and Mr. uh newcome or any thoughts he might have on best ways.
» I'm I'm just drafting an email for director of engineering just highlight
this discussion with him and uh he was the uh
engineering tech who designed our current standard for those coordinates.
uh they can listen to this discussion and give us some thought in terms of
maybe taking a second look at those that standard some of the concerns that you
raised or uh I mean it's also come up at the highway intersection obviously and
some of the drawbacks of that approach uh there's no solution um anyway I I
will raise it with them say that can't make
Yeah. So I I like I think there should I'm feeling there should be some sort of
resolution but I'm just struggling about what the
recommendation might be. Um >> other option might be gather more
information for staff on having you know maybe someone from engineering come
present on what our approach has been to date. We'll know that that's done.
» You know what? I you know what? I kind of I like that idea because um then at
least engineering can tell us what they actually are doing and maybe they do
have a plan rather than the committee making a recommendation and it's kind of
you know moot because staff already know. So maybe the motion could be that
uh we we ask engineering staff from the municipalities to attend the next back
meeting to talk about accessibility at intersections.
You're asking.
» Sorry. You're asking the council that said they're
» Oh, okay. >> Okay.
» Yeah. Okay. Good.
» Thanks again, Richard. >> Thank you. Welcome. I think we had a
letter to the uh airport authority which seems self
explanatory. >> Yeah.
» Um I just wanted to mention that the uh and it's posted here the island de and
harden of hearing center was closed uh rather suddenly. They ran out of money
and um their government's contract expired a couple years ago but they ran
out of money like at June 30th and there was very little notice given to anybody.
So that the uh deaf and heart of hearing community are really struggling because
that was their their go-to spot for all things, you know, for for uh social
activity, for getting uformational resources, for u um figuring out what to
do with their children's education, [clears throat] all those things. And uh
so I'm I just raise it so people can think about what we might be able to do
for our deaf and heart heart of hearing people in our community perhaps. um um
beacon community services where the Shaw Center could be at least a meeting place
for people. You might want to um run that up the flag pole and see where it
goes. >> Yes. So, I'm going to uh unfortunately
those people from the disability um alliance of BC had to leave, but I'll
follow up with them as well to see if they can offer some assistance.
Okay. Any more thoughts on that? >> Yeah,
» I'll work on the Shaw Center, but I think that that's
probably considered anyways
resource maybe states.
» Yeah. Much much like the White Cane Club, at least if people had a chance to
go there, I I think they go there and they they play cards or they exchange
stories or information. Um much like I'm sure the White Gang Club does. So it' be
would be ideal I think. >> Okay. And then we have uh one letter
which um I don't think was really accessibility oriented but it's there
for information. >> Can we do my parking?
» Yes. Did I fly by that? >> Yeah.
» Oh yeah. Are you going to counselor GPD is gonna
» Yes. Go ahead. >> Yeah. So I just wanted to bring up the
and again I I realize that North Sanage is busy. They're they've got all sorts
of stuff going on. Part of the just a bit of a background in 2018 the province
took accessible parking out of the building code and it was up to every
municipality, city, whatever to come up with their own accessible parking
standards. Um we started working with Sydney, North Sanich and and um central
Sanich and came up with accessibility plans that were kind of the best case
scenario. at the time Nor Sanich put one through that they followed the FCA B651
which was the the Canadian standard which we then found out was not optimal
but at that time North Sanage was putting it through with other bylaw
changes and they they were going to said no problem we'll just push this through
when we do the OCP we will improve on that
was 2019 So, we hit the pandemic, we hit new council, we hit new planners. Um,
nothing got changed. Um, we now have
we're we're going into another election cycle. There's this draft zoning bylaw
has been put forward and I did see that in it in um
the the draft zoning bylaw the accessible parking is under 404 in the
bylaw and they have just said that they are going to use the the SCAB 651
standard again which again is not the acceptable standard. Last July at the
SPACK meeting, we were told that North Sanage would harmonize with Central
Sanage and Sydney's accessible parking. So, the reason I bring this up now is
because like the the expediency that Wayne Rogue was put through uh the
neglect to bring Wolf Orchard to us, I want to make sure that this draft zoning
bylaw doesn't get approved with this accessible parking standard. So I don't
know whether it's something that do I bring a a a recommendation that this
accessibility zoning bylaw is not accepted without
bringing it to SPAC for our input. Um because I as things stand right now
North Sanage does not have an accessible parking standard that allows me to park
anywhere with my Side Wrap van. Um, Sandown Center was a missed opportunity.
I don't go there because there's no parking for me. Um, the Roost just redid
their accessible parking at their place. Does not have parking for me. So, we've
missed an opportunity in this eight years that we've been not doing anything
with the accessible parking at North Sanage. We've missed opportunities. And
as we all know, once they've been done according to whatever the bylaw was when
they built it, that's what stands. So I just wanted to do I don't know
going forward I want to make sure we don't miss an opportunity with North
Sage. >> So councelor DBT what what is it you
need from us to make that happen? >> I mean I think I think like other things
that you know I think we were getting to a really good place where we were just
expecting you know like central sage where they just automatically come. Uh
that hasn't been happening from us. So I think uh you know if Spack makes a
recommendation requesting that the zoning bylaw be presented and even in
that motion at a you know and I missed writing down the exact
» and that it be harmonized with the other two municipalities
» right and that can either come up out of that presentation and conversation or
that can just come up as part of the recommendation either of those are
a okay >> uh councelor O'Keefe Um just looking to
Mr. Nukem and from Central Sandwich. So have I think we have harmonized like
between does Sydney and Central Sanage have have we harmonized our accessible
parking? Is it >> I believe it's similar.
» Okay.
» Place council made a change or two that was
adopted. Okay. >> Okay. So, I guess one way of going at
So, there's something specific that you've identified. So you could we could
make a motion that Norah Sanage change the zoning bylaw or section blah blah
blah of the zoning bylaw related to whatever that se you know that standard
was or or just say that in instead of adopting that standard that North Sanich
adopt the accessible parking standards uh or or harmonize their accessible
parking standards with Sydney and Central Sanage.
» What what was mentioned to me is I think where North Sanich was having a bit of a
problem and it was told to me that they're different because they're rural.
I think where they didn't want to harmonize with Sydney and Central Sanage
was in the ratio of parking spaces and accessible
spaces, which to me, figure out figure out your ratios for your building,
whatever with your parking, but don't skimp on the actual size of
your parking. Right? >> So, I'm not sure why that would be. I
mean, if you're going to have a grocery store, whether it's in a rural area or
» Exactly. >> like sand down is like a shopping and
» so I just again uh so I don't know how my my impetus in bringing this is I just
wanted to make sure that this wouldn't progress any further in without it being
looked at and made sure that we're doing it in the best possible way. Um, so to
make a recommendation uh that SPACK recommends that North Sanage not proceed
with their um with the draft zoning bylaw accessible parking portion until
they present it to to SPACK for >> it might be short it might be a shorter
route to do what councelor >> so so what I so what I was just to
finish my thought that kind of ran >> it must have been good because Anna
actually typed it >> to to make the specific recommendations
to harmonize their accessible parking with Sydney and Central Sanage. Make
that one. And then if you thought that there was other elements of the zoning
bylaw that were relevant, there's a whole pile of stuff in the zoning bylaw,
you don't want to be bothered. But if there was parts of that that you thought
should come to SPACK, then you could make a second recommendation that
sections, you know, that the the rest of the bylaw be referred to back for
additional review and comment from an accessibility perspective.
So, but I don't know what is in their zoning bylaw and whether you have
something. >> I mean, I just it was all I could do to
zone in on the the draft bylaw and find the accessible parking.
Yeah. Or sorry
BC1 that we think is uh preferred or superior.
You're shaking your head. No, >> we don't have a BC1.
» We That's what this whole the discussion came about a few years ago because there
used to be a provincial standard, right? And then the province said, "We're not
going to do that anymore. You municipalities decide what's best for
you." And so that's why there was all this kuffles in past meetings about,
okay, we were all doing different standards and had different ideas in our
minist. And so hence the desire for you know, Sydney and Central Sage did that.
[clears throat] >> And do you mind do you mind reading back
what councelor Keefe said initially and maybe it's good enough for it? Yes.
» North was there accessible park
» and should we add um before considering passing the the U
» well I I think there's there's two separate things. One is very specific to
parking but the other is accessibility as it pertains to the entire zoning.
» Yes. >> Accessibility is not just limited to
» Yes. Yeah. And so that's why I would suggest that a motion not be I mean the
recommendation council can >> Yeah.
Gotcha. >> Um but I think if the motion is to
request that the zoning bylaw be presented just like the other
municipalities have so that we can provide feedback so that SPAC can
provide feedback on all accessibility components within the zoning bylaw.
Then the report is not the entire zoning bylaw. It's everything that's related to
accessibility. And that way the report can present the powerpoint to be done up
and then it comes. Now I don't even have a timeline from staff yet as to when
we're going to see zoning by yet. So based on that I can suspect that it's
going to be a little while but we've all seen what's happened previously. So if
if there wants to be something a little more specific
as far as not to go to second reading until it's come back that can certainly
be done but I just don't know what the timeline
is. I think it's important that [clears throat]
» just like what Central Sage did with theirs, it actually comes from
accessibility like just those components comes back
» to add a little staff perspective on that motion. It's very wrong.
» Um there was a comment earlier about uh the the
number of spaces versus you know maybe the geometric considerations. So you
might want to think about specificity of it because I agree that you know the the
number of spaces required might be very different in no sanage in context than
it would be in Sydney for example >> and so are you asking for
the number of required spaces >> the motion by that it's very
» yeah again my thinking on that was again I I know the my only perspective I had
with North Sanich and the numbers was Sandown and they did ask for a variance
to change the numbers. Um I think both Central Sanich and um
and Sydney both say that no matter what the what the figuring out number was,
they couldn't adapt the accessible ones. They couldn't change the accessible ones
according to plan. So I don't I I mean I know for myself, yes, they might be
smaller numbers or whatever. So, I don't I don't necessarily know that it get
into the into the weeds of how many spaces there have to be, but I
definitely think we need to make sure that we're we're putting in accessible
spaces that work for >> We need to get to the motion and get it
done or we're going to miss >> get done. Is the standard that you
talked about was that this because was that the standard my recollection it was
in regards to what the spaces looked like?
» Yes. >> Right. and so how wide they would be
accessible aisles that sort of thing. So I think maybe that's what you want to to
Mr. point that spec specificity
» I was just worried about. >> Yeah, that's know it's too broad. Um,
» so the way to get about that might be am I going to have I'm really going to have
to leave because I got somebody showing up in my house at 10 minutes. Um but
would be to adjust the motion to say um uh for North Sanage to
amend or in in consideration of their zoning bylaw instead of using standard
blah blah blah >> the standard uh harmonize that with uh
Sydney and North Sanish because that doesn't get into the number of spaces.
is that only relates to the width of the space, the accessible aisles, how
they're marked and identified. >> So maybe that's the way around that. And
then the number of spots, that's a whole other other thing.
» Can you read off the uh the uh standard number again for
» CSA B651?
Okay, we have a motion seconder. Mr. Wellland,
any discussion? All the question all in favor?
Carried. >> Good. We lost all of our people here.
» I think just I know everybody's got to go the last minute, but I think
Batista's comment about having the zoning bylaw back.
» Oh, yeah. Another motion. That's a good idea. lost somewhere on that whether
» make the motion. >> Sure, I'll make the motion.
» I'll second. >> Yeah. No, fair enough.
» SPAC recommends that the district of North Sanage present the accessibility
portions of the zoning bylaw to SPACK prior to adoption
» or just say refer the zoning bylaw. Don't say the accessibility because
» that's why you say the accessibility component because you don't want to sit
here and read 400 pages of a zoning bylaw.
» I think one the components that are related to accessibility
» and referent. >> Yeah.
» Referred. Yeah. >> Yeah.
» Okay. >> Okay.
» Seconder I guess. Okay. Charlie discussion
all in favor
carried and u motion for adjournment.
[clears throat] >> Lots of people.
» We got to go. We're >> out of here.
» Thank you everybody. >> Thank you.