Regular Council - 02 May 2023


1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
2: ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3: DELEGATIONS/PETITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
3.i: Proclamation Request: National Hospice Palliative Care Week: May 7-13, 2023
4: CONSIDERATION OF UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
5: PUBLIC HEARINGS
6: SCHEDULED (TIMED) ITEMS
6.A: COMMUNITY PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
6.A.i: Development Variance Permit No. 00021 (1779 Vista Crescent)
7: CONSENT AGENDA
7.A: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
7.A: Staff Recommendation:
7.A.i: Committee of the Whole: April 18, 2023
7.A.ii: Special Business Meeting: April 18, 2023
7.A.iii: Regular Business Meeting: April 18, 2023
7.A.iv: Committee of the Whole: April 25, 2023
7.A.v: Special Business Meeting: April 25, 2023
7.B: CORRESPONDENCE - Receive for Information
7: CORRESPONDENCE - Referred to Staff
7: Staff Recommendation:
7.C: STAFF UPDATES - For Information
7: END OF CONSENT AGENDA
8: CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
9: BYLAWS
9.A: FIRST THREE READINGS
9.A.i: District of Squamish 2023 Property Tax Rates Bylaw No. 2960, 2023
9.B: ADOPTION
9.B.i: District of Squamish 2023-2027Five Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 2941, 2022 Amendment (Spring) Bylaw No. 2962, 2023
9.B.ii: District of Squamish Alternative Municipal Tax Collection Scheme Bylaw No. 2966, 2023
9.B.iii: District of Squamish Sewer Rates and Regulation Bylaw 404, 1972, Amendment Bylaw No. 2969, 2023
9.B.iv: District of Squamish Solid Waste Utility and Regulation Bylaw 2547, 2017, Amendment Bylaw No. 2968, 2023
9.B.v: District of Squamish Water Rates Regulations and Water Extension Bylaw No. 676, 1980, Amendment Bylaw No. 2967, 2023
10: STAFF REPORTS
11: LATE AGENDA ITEMS
12: CORRESPONDENCE - ACTION REQUESTED
13: CORRESPONDENCE REFERRED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
14: APPROVAL OF MINUTES REFERRED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
15: BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES
16: COMMITTEE MINUTES AND REPORTS
17: NOTICE OF MOTION
18: COUNCIL - STAFF IN CAMERA ANNOUNCEMENTS
18.i: Motions Brought Forward From Closed Council Meeting: July 26, 2022 Special Business Meeting
19: UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
20: OPEN QUESTION PERIOD - CLARIFICATION RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS
21: COUNCIL OR STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
22: MOTION TO CLOSE
23: TERMINATION
- Welcome, Adoption of Agenda, Proclamation
0:00:00 (0:09:20)

In the first stage of the council meeting, Diana Gunstone, representing the Sea to Sky Hospice Society, presented a request for the proclamation of May 7th to 13th as National Hospice Palliative Care Week. The theme for this year is "Palliative Care Everywhere," emphasizing the importance of providing palliative care in various settings, such as hospices, long-term care facilities, hospitals, and homes. Gunstone explained that palliative care is person-centered and aims to alleviate the suffering of people facing life-limiting illnesses, regardless of their location, illness, or prognosis. Comprehensive hospice palliative care includes respite for caregivers, mental health and spiritual support, and ensuring the best quality of life for patients and their families.

In addition to the proclamation request, Gunstone also raised awareness for the annual fundraising month of May for the Sea to Sky Hospice Society. She invited the District of Squamish to engage their employees in participating in the 17th annual Sea to Sky Hike for Hospice, which aims to raise awareness and funds for the society. The Sea to Sky Hospice Society employs three part-time contractors, including a clinical counselor, and has over 60 volunteers providing supportive services and programs for palliative residents, caregivers, and those navigating bereavement in the corridor.

Lastly, Gunstone extended an invitation to the council members to attend a celebration event on May 27th at OCM Pavilion Park, where the goals for the hospice fundraising event are hoped to be reached. The council members expressed their gratitude for the important work done by the Sea to Sky Hospice Society and their support for the proclamation request.

Armand Hurford
0:00:00 (0:00:53)

hello and welcome to the regular business meeting for the District of Squamish on today is Tuesday May 2nd 2023 and as always we're gathered to do our work today on the traditional unseated territory of the Squamish Nation can I have someone move adoption of the agenda please move by councilor Stoner second by counselor French all in favor motion carries please be advised that this council meeting is being live streamed recorded and will be available to the public to view on the district Squamish website following the meeting if you have concerns please notif notify the corporate officer present at the meeting first order of business under delegations we have a proclamation request for National hospice palliative care week for May 7 to 13 and I believe we have someone to speak to it yes yeah please come forward and you speak from the and you've you have five minutes to address Council

SPEAKER_09
0:00:53 (0:04:57)

wonderful thank you mayor Herford and Council my name is Diana gunstone and this time I present before you on behalf of the Cena Sky Hospice Society whose mission in this Corridor is to promote and provide Compassionate Care for those facing life-limiting illness for those at end of life and for their families in terms of bereavement support of a loved one so on behalf of the society I'm here to request the proclamation of May 7th to 13th as National hospice palliative care week and the theme this year is palliative care everywhere which I would like to speak to for a minute palliative care is an approach that aims to alleviate the suffering of people facing a life-limiting illness it can be provided in any setting from hospice to long-term care to hospital and to home hence the theme for palliative care everywhere palliative care is person-centered care that means in part that wherever a person is with a life-limiting illness palliative care can be provided if someone is facing significant health related suffering because of a life-limiting illness palliative care can help regardless of the setting of care regardless of their illness or prognosis and regardless of their postal code comprehensive and quality hospice palliative care provides support for every aspect of someone's life that is impacted by illness and it includes respite for caregivers and loved ones it includes mental health and spiritual support and it ensures the best quality of life it is holistic care to support the mind the body the soul and the family when and where they need it most every family navigating the challenges that arrive arise when a loved one is diagnosed with life-limiting illness deserves the best quality of care and support that we can offer in Hospice at home in long-term care in the hospital there are no limits to where someone can receive palliative care to meet their needs so I would like to ask how you will support compassion dignity and Care in our community this National hospice palliative care week and I ask you to do your part to ensure that across the country there is palliative care everywhere in addition to the request to Proclaim this week or next week as palliative care everywhere we I also want to raise awareness that may is the annual fundraising month for the city Sky Hospice Society and it's our 17th annual Sea to Sky hike for hospice it used to be the Squamish hike for hospice but the name has changed and we're now see to Sky Hospice Society so it is a hike for hospice across the sea the sky and we'd like to invite the District of Squamish to engage their employees to participate perhaps on a district of Squamish team during the month of May to help raise awareness and funds for the Sea to Sky Hospice Society the society engages three part-time contractors one of which is a clinical counselor and we have over 60 volunteers that provide Supportive Services and programs for palliative residents caregivers and those navigating bereavement in this corridor no other organization that I'm aware of currently offers these important end of Life Services yet every citizen in this Corridor will seek this support at one time during their life or during the life of or during the loss of a loved one so it is important support that we hope we can deliver up and down the corridor for years to come so yeah that's one request in addition to the proclamation and I'm going to leave behind a poster with QR code and information about the hike for Hospice we're engaging with many businesses and organizations across the corridor to come out and throughout the month raise awareness and hopefully some funding to support the programs on the back side of this are a few of the programs to give you an idea of what we are running in our community and on May 27th we will have a big celebration at ocm pavilion Park and so that's my second ask is an invitation to all of you to come out to that celebration on the 27th and we hope that our goals for the hospital hospice fundraising event will be reached at that point so thank you for your time and yes I hope the proclamation will be received

Armand Hurford
0:05:51 (0:00:53)

thank you so much can also do you have any questions for our guests seeing nana be open to I will move the proclamation and second by counselor Hamilton I and I'll speak to it briefly thank you so much for the very important work that you do I there was a period of time a few years back where I lost a grandparents a year all through the hospice program in Squamish and I just had a close friend lose his mother passed through the hospice in the Nanaimo just on just on Thursday and I spent some time over there as well that so such important work that you do and it's a invaluable service to our community so thank you so much I'm happy to support this Proclamation counselor stoner

SPEAKER_12
0:06:44 (0:01:12)

yeah I too am very happy to support this Proclamation and thanks for the invitation to both support the hospice to hike for hospice and join the celebration on May 27th I hope to be there I just want to reflect on the change to broaden to the Ceta Sky hospice foundation and it's one that I think is really important I've heard from colleagues and counterparts and in Whistler and Pemberton the reality that our Healthcare supports really are court or wide and so just wanted to reflect on that broadening and recognize that there are folks throughout the corridor who's who are benefiting and receiving support from the hospice and so um looking forward to having a kind of regional approach to this and I know that so many folks have moved through the corridor throughout different phases of their life and that goes on as we help support families and individuals as they perhaps start to deal with some of the life limiting illnesses that do unfortunately touch so many of us so I wanted to reflect on that and thank you again for all the work that you do you show up here in Council in so many ways on so many volunteer hacks that you wear and we're fortunate to have you in our community Diana so thanks for being

SPEAKER_09
0:07:56 (0:00:02)

thank you very much

Armand Hurford
0:07:59 (0:00:01)

Council penngill

Chris Pettingill
0:08:00 (0:00:26)

yeah I just want to Echo the thoughts of my colleagues and pick up on what counselor Stoner said I'm learning when Mrs gunstone comes to present to us something critical to our community that she's putting a lot of time into you are tireless in terms of working on things that are just sort of foundational to our community so this is very important happy to support it and thank you very much for all the work you do for Squamish

SPEAKER_09
0:08:27 (0:00:21)

thank you very much I if it's appropriate I would like to leave we have through the BC hospice Association there's a campaign of awareness and it just talks about how hospices are as diverse as wildflowers so I'd like to leave a little bag and brochures if anybody wants to help themselves and spread that and read that delighted thank you

Armand Hurford
0:08:48 (0:00:55)

thank you thank you so much we'll absolutely do that maybe yeah Miss Arthur's will take that from you so seeing no other comments I'll call the question all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you so much okay moving on our next item of business is consideration of unscheduled public attendance so if anyone has a matter that cannot wait until the next regular business meeting this would be the time to bring that forward for consideration seeing none will move on we have no public hearings scheduled this evening we're moving on to scheduled items so we have a development permit development variance permit number 21 for 1779 Vista Crescent and oh yes councilor Anderson

- Item 6Ai - Development Variance Permit No. 00021 (1779 Vista Crescent)
0:09:20 (0:59:25)

In the council meeting, Trevor Witt, a planner with the community planning department, presented Development Variance Permit (DVP) 21 for 1779 Vista Crescent. The subject property is located at the corner of Vista Crescent and Northridge Drive in the Hospital Hill neighborhood. The site is currently developed with a single detached home encroaching on the subject property, which is lot one. The current development will be demolished to make room for one single detached home per lot, with the variance requests only for the corner lot one.

The property is zoned RS1 Residential One, and the OCP land use designation is Residential Neighborhood. DVP 21 proposes to vary the exterior side setbacks to allow for the construction of a single detached home and an accessory garage building. The proposed home is two stories with a basement secondary suite, fitting with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The project aligns with the OCP policy to support infill development in all neighborhoods.

The applicant is seeking two variances to the zoning bylaw. The first variance is for Section 6. 6a for the exterior side setback of the principal building from 4. 57 meters to 3 meters. The second variance is for Section 4. 4d4 for the exterior side setback of the accessory building from 4. 57 meters to 2. 14 meters. Staff are supportive of the variance request, as it would allow for the construction of a single detached home and a secondary suite rental unit.

DVP 21 was posted to the district's development showcase, and a development sign was installed on the property. One public information meeting request was made, but no public information meeting was held. Variance notices were sent to residents within 100 meters of the property as per legislative requirements. Two letters were received with concerns about too much density changing the character of the neighborhood and to receive more information on the project.

Staff recommend that the District of Squamish authorize the issuance of DVP 21 as presented for the property at 1779 Vista Crescent, subject to registration of a covenant securing electric energy sources for heating the building and hot water, committing to no gas fireplaces or cooking appliances, removal of the existing building on the adjacent lot 2 prior to building permit issuance, and covering the cost of temporarily relocating the bus stop in front of Lot 1 during construction. Staff also recommend that the District of Squamish approve the variances presented to the exterior side setbacks for the principal building and the accessory building, and that the mayor and corporate officer be authorized to execute DVP 21. Alternatively, council could not authorize the development variance permit or refer the development back to staff.

SPEAKER_13
0:09:43 (0:00:09)

mayor Herford I wish to declare a conflict of interest on this matter I am a property owner in reasonable proximity to 1779 Vista Crescent

Armand Hurford
0:09:53 (0:00:27)

thank you Council Anderson we will come and find you when we're when we're done don't it's a beautiful night out there so don't wander off too far we'll yeah counselor green law who for those of you that are here counselor Greenwell is attending remotely and has laryngitis so Miss Arthur's has been her has been her voice but she's going to try now so to you counselor

SPEAKER_08
0:10:20 (0:00:08)

I also have conflict of interest I'll let Robin's in okay

Armand Hurford
0:10:29 (0:00:03)

we're part we're part way there we just need the reasoning but

SPEAKER_09
0:10:32 (0:00:07)

okay due to the products are pretty to my own

Armand Hurford
0:10:39 (0:01:19)

thank you so much for attending our meetings all day today and for and for participation so we will take the appropriate steps to come back to when we're done this topic so if you could log off the meeting at actually the Council green law councilor Greenlaw she physically left can you okay sorry we'll just wait a second until we get our almost there can we she's gone we could exclude her cut her out of the I just see her camera still on so I also make sure we're on the right side on oh cameras off so cancer greenlaf you can hear us we need you to log out of the meeting and then we'll text you to when it's time to log back in when we're done this item oh and I was able to remove her okay bit of a false start there I'll turn it over to staff to introduce yourself and the topic please

SPEAKER_10
0:11:59 (0:03:54)

hello American Council my name is Trevor Witt I'm a planner with the community planning department today I will be presenting DVP 21 at 1779 Vista Crescent which is requesting two variances to the zoning bylaw a subject property is located at the corner of Vista Crescent and Northridge Drive in the hospital Hill and neighborhood this site is currently developed with the neighboring law at number two with a single detached home encroaching on the subject property which is lot one the current development will be demolished to make room for one single detached home per lot the variance requests are only for the corner lot one the property is zoned rs1 residential one and the ocp land use designation is residential neighborhood DVP 21 proposes to vary the exterior side setbacks to allow for the construction of a single detached home and an accessory garage building the proposed home is two stories with a basement secondary Suite which fits with the character of the surrounding neighborhood the project is in line with the ocp policy to support infield development in all neighborhoods with the current zoning setbacks there is only a width of 3.95 meters of buildable land which is not feasible for a single detached home the applicant is seeking two variances to the zoning bylaw the first variances is for Section 6.6 a for the exterior side setback of the principal building from 4.57 meters to 3 meters and the second variance is for Section 4.4 D4 for the exterior side setback of the accessory building from 4.57 meters to 2.14 meters stuff are supportive of the variance request as these variances would allow for the construction of a single detached home and a secondary Suite rental unit DVP 21 was posted to the district's development showcase and a development sign was installed on the property one public information meeting request was made and no public information meeting was held variance notices were sent to Residents within 100 meters of the property as per legislative requirements two letters have been received with concerns about too much density changing the character of the neighborhood and to receive more information on the project staff recommend that the District of Squamish authorized the issuance of DVP 21 as presented for the property at 1779 Vista Crescent subject to registration of a covenant which would secure electric energy sources for the heating of the building and hot water and committing to no gas fireplaces or cooking appliances as well as the removal of the existing building on the adjacent lot 2 prior to building permit issuance and covering the cost of temporarily relocating the bus stop that's in front of Lot 1 during construction staff also recommend that the District of Squamish approved the variances presented to the exterior side setbacks for the principal building and the accessory building and that the mayor and corporate officer be authorized to execute DVP 21. alternatively council could not authorize the development variance permit or refer the development back to staff thank you for listening and I welcome any questions and comments

Armand Hurford
0:15:54 (0:00:24)

thank you and um Council questions for staff and before we get into that we will here have opportunity to hear from the public after Council has questions answered from staff so we're all working with the same information and then we'll go to the go to the public I have a bit of a blurb to read about that but we'll start with Council questions and then we'll go we'll go there questions counselor

Chris Pettingill
0:16:19 (0:00:23)

penango just and I hope I'm not misunderstanding The Proposal but are we setting ourselves up for when it comes time to redevelop Lot 2 will be asked to very side setbacks that will start impacting neighbors or and is that sort of thing we can consider now or should consider now

SPEAKER_10
0:16:43 (0:00:14)

these setback variances will just be to facilitate the construction of the building on lot 2. and will not affect any other developments in the neighborhood

SPEAKER_11
0:16:57 (0:00:03)

to the mayor oh

Armand Hurford
0:17:01 (0:00:00)

yes go ahead

SPEAKER_11
0:17:02 (0:00:27)

and clarify um I believe the concern is that the neighboring lot is the concern that there might be variances for the adjacent lot and I believe that particular lot will be able to achieve a single-family home without variances because it's an interior side setback so the concern here is it's on a corner lot in the exterior side setback is the concern

Armand Hurford
0:17:29 (0:00:14)

thank you for that clarity does that adjust your concern counselor okay counsel any other questions oh go ahead go ahead counselor stoner

SPEAKER_12
0:17:44 (0:00:38)

thank you sorry exterior side setbacks always make my mind go a little bit wonky in the staff report says there's a 5.7 meter right away between the lot line and the road along Northridge and therefore this building will maintain an 8.7 meter setback from the road that 8.7 meter setback from the road is that consistent with the remainder like what when you say it will maintain an 8.7 meter setback is that consistent with something else along that Street or is that just how much room is left if you consider the right-of-way plus the setback

SPEAKER_10
0:18:23 (0:00:06)

through the mayor that is just the distance between the house and the road

Armand Hurford
0:18:30 (0:00:31)

thank you I had a question on this as well and just looking at some of the graphics provided it looks like is that number how similar is that number the 8.7 to the fronts yard setbacks further down the is it Northridge like for instance at 10 45 or 10 55 Northridge just past I was trying to understand how this would or could look in relation to the to the neighborhood

SPEAKER_10
0:19:01 (0:00:11)

the front setback for this zone is 7.62 meters so this would be a larger setback than the frontage of the other Lots on the street

Armand Hurford
0:19:12 (0:00:49)

okay thank you and those lots on I get that this is a corner piece and that's where it gets really complicated but on Northridge I believe we dealt in our zoning bylaw on these smaller Lots we had some adjustments for to make them buildable I get that this one wasn't part of that that's why we're having this discussion but how with where we're sort of being asked to land with this how does that compare with those other Lots I could use those other ones to the north on Northridge 10 45 10 55 that block is really narrow lots and must have similar concerns do we end up with a setback that's similar to those on the other sides

SPEAKER_13
0:20:02 (0:00:02)

SPEAKER_11
0:20:05 (0:00:27)

that's okay so I think the challenges and or the difference here with this particular application is it's a corner lot and so it has an exterior side setback so a lot of those properties along Northridge don't have those exterior side lots and don't have those same challenges so that's why lot one would actually comply without a variance and be able to build a single family home where this particular one on the corner can't because of the exterior side setback

Armand Hurford
0:20:33 (0:00:27)

okay so then the interior on the other side like is that a similar setback to the rest of the neighborhood on the back part of the property and on the other side I understand the exterior side set back is what we're discussing and varying but I'm just are we Landing in essentially the same spot it just feels a bit strange because of the because of the corner nature and that exterior side setback aspect

SPEAKER_11
0:21:00 (0:00:11)

yeah so to confirm the interior side setback for this zone is 1.52 meters and that is yeah that's consistent throughout that whole neighborhood

Armand Hurford
0:21:12 (0:00:24)

okay yeah thank you in the comments it said that there was letters received asking for information which feels like a in was that information provided did it trigger correspondence or it just felt like that description may not have captured the whole context what was happening could you expand upon that

SPEAKER_10
0:21:36 (0:00:17)

yes I the drawings were uploaded to the development showcase and at some point there was a glitch with the development showcase and so they were re-uploaded after the letter was given to us

Armand Hurford
0:21:54 (0:00:09)

okay thank you Council any further questions before we go to the public or comment oh yeah go ahead customer

Chris Pettingill
0:22:04 (0:00:17)

I just want to clarify just be using a lot one in the diagrams I have it looks like the proposal is for lot one which is on the outside along Northridge and lot twos on the in chair is that correct and Lot 2 is not proposed for development it's lot one is that

SPEAKER_10
0:22:21 (0:00:09)

this subject property is lot one on the corner lot and both will have a single family home

Armand Hurford
0:22:31 (0:02:43)

yeah and my understanding there was that because that lot the other lot we're not discussing with the variance is isn't a corner lot we doesn't need the variances to achieve so okay seeing no other questions from Council at this at this point I'm going to go to the public and I have a bit of a blurb to read so bear with me before we get there so for development permit number 21 for 1779 Vista Crescent the proponent and members of the public will be given the opportunity to be heard electronically or in person with respect to proposed variances to District or Squamish zoning bylaw number 2200 2011. there are two proposed variances to the zoning bylaw and the proposed variances are outlined in the staff report members of the public are reminded that you may only speak to the variances during this process the purpose of the proposed variances to section 6.6 a exterior side setback for principal building is from 4.57 meters to 3 meters and section 4.4 exterior side setback for accessory building is from 4.57 meters to 2.14 meters all speakers will be given a maximum of five minutes to address Council I will first call on speakers participating in person please raise your hand and wait to be recognized for all speakers please approach the podium and start your remarks by clearly stating your name and neighborhood details to participate via telephone or on the WebEx platform are displayed or will be shortly displayed on screen for those who have logged in from a computer or are watching the live stream of the meeting and are include and are included on the district website if you're participating by phone and wish to be added to the speakers list please press star 3 on your telephone to raise your hand if you are participating via the WebEx platform and your name is add your name to the speakers list by opening the participant panel and clicking on the hand icon please note that when it's your turn to speak you'll receive a voice prompt via telephone or a dialog box via WebEx please commence your remarks by clearly stating your name and neighborhood If you experience technical difficulties please use the chat function to send the host a message or email hearing squamish.ca having said all of that I do have a speakers list here which is where we'll start we have Donald Christie first to speak and please approach the podium and you have five minutes to address

SPEAKER_10
0:25:14 (0:00:05)

Council

Armand Hurford
0:25:20 (0:00:04)

but one second oh there we go we're good we just want to get the microphone nope one more Julie

SPEAKER_00
0:25:24 (0:00:02)

I need some education here obviously

Armand Hurford
0:25:26 (0:00:03)

that's okay you're you are all good to go take it

SPEAKER_00
0:25:30 (0:01:57)

away this particular exception was raised I guess six years ago and it was rejected they wanted to build three houses so they sold one now they got two lots and they still want the same setback I mean if this is anything short of a condo there's plenty of room for a single dwelling on two lots the concern as far as working we are if it's truly two stories and I heard there's going to be a basement Suite as well now I would assume the basement Suite is going to be Underground so we're looking at two stories above the ground that's quite acceptable in our area the most of the I think all of the houses with the exception on the one that is going to be torn down they're all too story so they my only concern is I think we need to guarantee that they're not going to get a setback develop a house and then say well now we've got enough room to develop the other lot it's something doesn't make sense here unless they're planning on not going into farming on a grand scale that there's a lot of a lot of land there there's about 60 some odd feet in width and I'm assuming are they going to be using 33 foot width or do we know what the dimensions of the building are

Armand Hurford
0:27:28 (0:00:39)

so during this process what we do is we'll listen to your comments and then Council will pick up the points that they would like to hear more about from staff so we'll see if we can get your questions answered so I would if you have a list I would go through them and then we'll go through a few speakers and we'll give Council an opportunity to sort of picket the threads that they feel are pertinent and we'll see what we can do to get some clarity on the areas where there isn't any at this point so if you have any if you have any other pieces I'd say just keep going and then we'll see what we can collectively pick up and get answered for you

SPEAKER_00
0:28:08 (0:00:39)

well the dimension of the house isn't mentioned all it's mentioned is two lots and they want a an extension on the setback by a reduction on the setback the to me that doesn't make sense if you're going to put up one house it's either going to be an awful huge house or the intent is to get it to get it approved because it was rejected about six years ago and then we'll deal with the second lot and I don't think that is verbal

Armand Hurford
0:28:48 (0:00:21)

okay thank you we'll hear from other members of the public and we'll come back to Council will ask some questions of council and we'll see what we can get answered for you from that and these are opportunities to provide submission not to get the necessarily the dialogue going with staff but we can pick up those pieces as Council that's our role so thank

SPEAKER_00
0:29:09 (0:00:01)

you very much for the opportunity

Armand Hurford
0:29:10 (0:00:20)

thank you very much for bringing your concerns to us here tonight I know these this room is sometimes can be an intimidating space so I appreciate it when people can come in and see us is there is there anyone that was my speakers is there someone else would like to speak to it please approach the podium and start by stating your name and neighborhood thank you five minutes to dress Council

SPEAKER_08
0:29:31 (0:02:33)

okay my name is Lauren Baldwin and I live immediately adjacent to the existing dwelling in lot 2. um I did tell you my name next door that's enough right got your points okay so thank you mayor and Council for the opportunity to talk tonight I've been in the neighborhood for 13 years and immediately next door for seven and in those seven years the lot or the two lots have changed hands three times and each of the successive owners have tried to do something with that lot to develop it into two homes and it's always been or the way it's always been described to me and also when I followed up with planning is that it's not possible because the side setback is too great so my first question is what has changed in that time because these current owners had not been there for a really long time I'm trying to remember what year the ocp was but it wasn't the change was not super recent and then the other thing I wanted to ask about was just good neighborliness because in our neighborhood we tend to be pretty tight-knit and able to talk to one another somebody comes by the property every single day and I have asked so many times oh do you own the lot oh no it's not me could you tell me who it is nothing or I get oh it's I don't know who it is or it's somebody's dad and I just would love to know who our neighbor is so that we can have neighborly conversations about you know we're planning to do this stuff along the fence line can we have a conversation or am I suddenly going to wake up one day and there's a brand new fence blocking all the light for the garden I don't know and the track record has not been positive because the new landowner took over did all this work to maintain the fruit trees that had been kind of left the previous year or two and then right before the fruit was ripened on a Saturday morning bright and early up shows the tree chipper and every tree is raised and the guys that are working say oh it's going to be redeveloped so when I follow up with the district I get told oh no there's no plans for that but it's a Saturday and back then we didn't have bylaw working the way they are now on Saturday so we couldn't even verify whether it was okay to take all those mature trees yeah those are my main things I get that it's more about the lot too that my concerns lie but I also wonder why things are going ahead here and what can possibly be done to make sure that it's not a silo next door with no attempt to talk to the neighbors or share what's going on

Armand Hurford
0:32:05 (0:00:09)

okay thank you for your submission thank you do we have anyone online I'll just check with staff there before I go back to the audience

SPEAKER_06
0:32:15 (0:00:03)

thank you mayor Hereford there's nobody online

Armand Hurford
0:32:18 (0:00:25)

thank you is there anyone yeah hi suspect it is as much please and your name start with your name and your neighborhood and you have five minutes to dress Council hi we'll try to start just one other little comment would be we're trying to speak to the specific variances that are being asked I know that there's I know sometimes it's hard and I find it challenging this role as well to challenge my conversation sometimes to the specifics but that's where we're looking specifically for feedback on today

SPEAKER_07
0:32:44 (0:03:39)

okay hi my name is Diana hartik I live on 1045 Northridge Drive so right next to the property my biggest concern is how does the new development fit into the neighborhood it's mentioned it's a two-story building that's fine most of the buildings have two stories but there's also a basement my concern is will there be like plastic operations because I know there's Rock and the ground will it damage the closer buildings when there will be blasting operations also I have two little kids I'm very concerned about like will we live next to a construction site for the next five years because it looks like there will be like two buildings built on lot so one on lot two and one or not one and so for me that's like a time period of maybe five years of construction noise hazards dust everything that's included with it and it's a neighborhood with lots of families that have little children there is a back alley it's green it's not paved and all the neighbors the kids use it as like a recreation area so my concern is when there's like all the construction going on will it be blocked will there be waste storage will there be toilets will there be dust noise will it be dangerous for my children to be there for us to be there is still a building on that property and I heard it will be demolished in order to process with everything to proceed with everything I know it's the oldest building in the neighborhood so there is asbestos in it well I guess I'm concerned about health hazards when they will take it down and also like as the previous speaker mentioned there has been no communication with us so we could never really know who to talk to like it would be nice to know like a number a name an address or somebody to talk to when things come up like during the construction or if something goes wrong there hasn't been any attempts to say hi to the neighbors and that is my biggest concern like it's okay to build something we need new housing it's just like beaches neighborly communicate and we are not weird neighbors that don't want to have new people here or whatever it's just like say hi introduce yourself and it gives us a bad taste in the mouth you know I have a weird feeling what their plans are um are they good or is it just to make profit like it just seems with the basement and two stories it doesn't seem to be like all the other buildings in the neighborhood it for me it looks like yeah profit making building or two so I guess on the other lot there will be another similar building with like a basement and two stories too and as I mentioned it's a family-friendly neighborhood and we like to talk to each other and say hi so yeah that's my concern thanks

Armand Hurford
0:36:23 (0:00:21)

thank you Council I saw I saw your hand and we'll just we'll go around Council and then if someone would like to add an additional comment we'll invite that council did you hear any questions for come up for you during from our submissions here this afternoon evening I'll go with counselor Hamilton then

Andrew Hamilton
0:36:44 (0:00:08)

French sorry is it specifically we're respecting the public attendance or is it

Armand Hurford
0:36:52 (0:00:09)

it can be it can be anything but the but the idea is with these as we do rounds of just for everybody and attendance it might trigger something and yep that's

Andrew Hamilton
0:37:02 (0:00:27)

exactly what happened it triggered but it's a question first half the existing house on lot on 1779 currently lot two is that conforming to the existing side setbacks or is that legal non-conforming because it looks very it looks like that is currently closer than 1.5 meters to the property line

SPEAKER_10
0:37:30 (0:00:04)

yes it's legally non-conforming

Andrew Hamilton
0:37:34 (0:00:13)

so if in the likely event that something is constructed on Lot 2 that would be further the neighbor would have more distance to the house

SPEAKER_10
0:37:47 (0:00:08)

for the matter yes they will be confirming to the current selling by law

Armand Hurford
0:37:55 (0:00:05)

thank you for that counselor French and then counselor Stoner I see your hand okay then you're after Council friendship

John French
0:38:01 (0:00:54)

thanks mayor I have just pulled up through the development showcase the details that are posted online in the development showcase and when I've looked at the development showcase previously at stuff there it's often quite detailed and includes things like landscape plans and Architectural drawings and here all I see is a lot layout so what was there ever a Time when landscape and Architectural drawings were on the development showcase or is this that I'm looking at now the lot diagram the only thing that's been on the showcase

SPEAKER_11
0:38:56 (0:00:23)

so through the mayor to con to clarify this is a single family home variants and so we do not require any architectural plans or landscape drawings for these types of applications and that's probably why this doesn't look like most of the other applications that you see and what you see on the development showcase has been of what has been provided throughout the project

John French
0:39:19 (0:00:52)

okay so I'll try and creatively find a way to phrase this next thought as a question is it at our package that the counselors see which is also available for viewing through the District of Squamish website includes architectural drawings that give details like the height of the building that's proposed the width the length all those details that we were asked about earlier that a resident couldn't find so could you confirm for us that all those details like Building height width of the home the length of the home are publicly available and can be viewed through the district website

SPEAKER_10
0:40:12 (0:00:11)

for the Mary yes those are all on the development showcase

Armand Hurford
0:40:23 (0:00:07)

counselor Stoner all right Council fans you're okay or no okay 30 um sorry counselor store sorry I almost said the number that I'm thinking

SPEAKER_12
0:40:30 (0:00:17)

oh good thank you through the chair just a few points clarification can staff just provide me some historical context as to when these Lots were subdivided and when the building that's on there was currently built or when it was built

SPEAKER_10
0:40:48 (0:00:13)

through the mayor this is the original lot size that was in the 70s and I believe this is the original home that was on the lot

SPEAKER_12
0:41:01 (0:00:18)

and so the change that has happened is that we've changed our setbacks over time or the required setbacks over time which has been which has since made development on lot one basically infeasible

SPEAKER_11
0:41:20 (0:00:33)

so through the mayor I believe the regulation here it says it was changed in 1995 to support a 4.57 meter exterior setback at the time sometimes these regulations are created in generalities and they're not looking at every single lot and the impact it might have to every single property I believe the intention was to still support a single family home with in the character of these small Lots at this property however this particular property was developed with only one single family home that takes up the two lots hopefully that

SPEAKER_12
0:41:53 (0:00:23)

clear flies yeah that's very helpful thank you and then my last question is just in terms of the variance that's being requested is around the exterior side step back and it is along Northridge where there looks like there is a T intersection and so I'm just curious want to make sure that there's no potential traffic implications or sight line implications by moving that exterior side set back

SPEAKER_10
0:42:17 (0:00:06)

through the mayor there are no traffic implications

Armand Hurford
0:42:24 (0:00:03)

thank you Castle penniel

Chris Pettingill
0:42:27 (0:00:31)

yeah we've had a couple questions about communicating with the owners and so on I'm just wondering with the variance is there what is the requirement for there to be for us to provide communication with the owner versus the owner providing a communication Channel like is that something that's up to us as a local government to set or is that sort of provincially determined I'm just wondering if you can speak to that

SPEAKER_11
0:42:58 (0:00:42)

through the mayor our communication is purely for the variants and so we speak with the owner and we speak directly to the public and Council regarding the variance and only the variance with regards to the owner connecting with adjacent neighbors we don't have any regulation to require that however I will add something to this is that when buildings do get developed there are big signs on front of those properties and in those construction sites that do require contractors details and numbers and contact information and that usually is a good Avenue as well to try and connect I know

Armand Hurford
0:43:40 (0:00:02)

Miss Arthur's go to a corporate

SPEAKER_06
0:43:43 (0:00:29)

officer Hereford and just to add to what Ms Hamilton was saying the statutory requirement for a DVP doesn't include neighbor notification however our policy is to go over and above what is required in the legislation and we do notify neighbors within 100 meters of the affected property and give the allowance to come in and speak to the

Armand Hurford
0:44:13 (0:00:04)

variants

Chris Pettingill
0:44:17 (0:00:16)

and so just so I can clarify my guest from privacy legislation is that we would not be able to disclose or the identity of a developer and that would be up to a developer to share that information is that accurate

SPEAKER_06
0:44:34 (0:00:58)

or so when somebody puts an application in for development information contact information if it's a company that's developing we can provide that to them if it's a private individual what will happen is we might gather up comments or provide a neighbor's contact information if the neighbor provides it to us and then give it to the person the applicant but once the sign goes up on the property saying there's a development in place there has to be an Avenue for communication and sometimes we play go between

Armand Hurford
0:45:32 (0:00:05)

thank you actually I'll go to you first counselor

Andrew Hamilton
0:45:38 (0:00:21)

I noticed in the presentation that there was a request for public information for a public information meeting but no public information meeting was held is that is there any requirement to hold the public information meeting or is it how is that how is there a request and then no meeting

SPEAKER_11
0:46:00 (0:00:19)

so through the mayor our public information meeting policy is that once we once we receive over 10 meeting requests then we are required to hold a meeting we also hold meetings for very large rezoning projects or very large development projects but that's the threshold

Armand Hurford
0:46:19 (0:00:35)

thank you I'm going from the from the drawings and my I want to make sure I'm reading them correctly I'm looking at the width of the building it's one of the questions that understand the size of this I understand that there's not a height variance or required so it's within the limits from the drawings that I see the first floors are 5.48 meters or roughly 18 feet is that am I reading that correctly this isn't my I know a little bit about a lot of things but I just want to make sure that we're getting the right numbers and in place

SPEAKER_10
0:46:55 (0:00:05)

through the mayor the width of the building is 5.48 meters

Armand Hurford
0:47:01 (0:00:28)

okay thank you there was some concern and I think through development throughout the community around sort of the deacon deconstruction piece and which bylaws would apply to that I know that's not directly related to the variance here but I think it is a very real concern for members of our community so I don't know who's best positioned to sort of speak to the generals around that deconstruction aspect

SPEAKER_11
0:47:29 (0:01:06)

certainly I can answer some of those questions so when we have a demolition permit they will have to make an application for a demolition permit if there is asbestos in the building they do have to follow specific procedures to ensure that is content contained and dealt with appropriately so there shouldn't be any exposure or any of those concerns would be addressed we also have noise bylaws which would require construction at only certain periods of time during the day and during the weekends as well we also have sorry we also have a construction management plan so whenever you do have construction on a building you have to work with our engineering department around where you use our road right of ways to use for construction purposes so address to address the laneway concern because that laneway isn't built out it's not it's not designed to accommodate construction access and it likely is not something our engineering department would support as a construction access

Armand Hurford
0:48:35 (0:00:23)

okay thank you very much I see look I feel our rounds of questions have been addressed here so I'll go back to the to the public and see if anyone else would like to provide comment I'm just going to quickly check online and see I'm getting a no so thank you Miss Baldwin go ahead you've got

SPEAKER_08
0:48:59 (0:01:04)

air and now I've lost it yeah I just wanted to clarify on the question about asking for more information it was because there was nothing on the website it came back and there has been correspondence which I am grateful for I did ask about what would happen on the existing lot and it wasn't really clear until I came into the office on Friday to get more information and the existing home is on lot one and two and I see that what's proposed is that the demolition has to happen before something happens on lot one the corner lot and that it's going to be part of the proposed Covenant in order to get this variance so just understanding that it seems very much like lot one and two are part of what's on the table here in this conversation because they're both being referred to in the restrictive covenant so I just want to point that that's what my reasoning sees and then the demolition does it require the signage like a construction permit does or does it just happen that one day the house next door gets taken

Armand Hurford
0:50:04 (0:00:09)

down I'll invite we'll just I feel like there's a quick answer for this one so I'll just ask could you speak to the signage piece on the demolition bottle

SPEAKER_11
0:50:13 (0:00:08)

to my best knowledge I believe the signages are all required for all types of building permits which demolition permit is a building permit yeah

Armand Hurford
0:50:22 (0:00:18)

thank you and the signage there on the building permit side does have direct does require direct con contact number for the entity doing the work or overseeing that work being done so there might be an into your neighborly discussion if

SPEAKER_08
0:50:41 (0:00:19)

our neighbor wants to answer questions right it might just be whoever's doing the work and that's as far as it goes but I appreciate the efforts to try and help with that I'm sorry I'm not doing well at thinking in front of the mic here I had another question and I can't remember what it was

SPEAKER_12
0:51:01 (0:00:01)

yeah

Armand Hurford
0:51:03 (0:00:19)

it's okay you can take a deep breath you haven't used your five minutes yet if you'd like to regroup but I will see if anyone else would like to Venture any additional comments or and we can come back to you but I feel like oh okay Mr Christie

SPEAKER_00
0:51:22 (0:02:42)

the I think they what is proposed there's nothing wrong with the development there's everything wrong with The setback because what the setback does it in effect makes the lot one two point something meters wider okay I mean you don't move a line towards the road unless it's going to impact something on your lot so it's going to being a much larger lot or they're going to move the house over so the second lot meets the distance between two houses which right now I think is supposed to be 10 feet whatever that is in meters I would like to see the motion number one reject they set back and with a guarantee that only let a lot one is going to be developed and that lot two which is going to be demolished will be green space and there's a lot of good reasons why you would want a green space and you're looking at a reduction in bees butterflies you name it my neighbor is you know quite a well what do you call them Gardener I guess I don't know probably another name but yeah I was quite surprised when I saw the exact same thing coming forward when there was three lots and now there's two lots so you don't move a line to make a lot smaller you move it to make the log bigger or so the two lots will have a the required separation well I mean that's my thinking I mean it may be all wrong but I think the general public those myself and the neighbors need some guarantee that lot number two is not going to be developed in a say two three four five years from now and and everything's forgotten like it is it was forgotten that this had been asked for and rejected about five or ten years

SPEAKER_12
0:54:04 (0:00:04)

ago

SPEAKER_00
0:54:09 (0:00:14)

15 years ago a time flies I can't believe it appreciate you hearing us ramble on but that's where we are

Armand Hurford
0:54:23 (0:00:08)

thank you so much for your perspective now I'll go back to miss Paula did you come up with some porn then we're gonna need to draw our conversation to close here yeah

SPEAKER_08
0:54:32 (0:01:17)

is this the question about the bus stop because it is actually in lot two right now and I just wondered what the purple is there I know when we developed next door the bus stop was in the middle and we asked about it getting changed and it sounded like there was a whole lot of Nod in my front yard and yeah I just wondered where it would go and what the plan is for that we love having it close by and I was just going to add to the history of the Lots I know from when we purchased lot 3 that it was more than 100 years ago and that was at I guess 106 or more years ago now and before we moved in there was the request for the three lots one two and three to all be redeveloped with different side setbacks and the whole neighborhood showed up to say no way Jose and so when we wanted to build in the neighborhood we did have to go through quite a lengthy process of talking to all the neighbors and getting their feedback and learning their stories and then okay well if we're planning to do this would this fit with what you understand and so that opportunity to talk to Neighbors was great but it was also necessary because there was so much heat around this particular set of lots thank you for the chance to speak

Armand Hurford
0:55:49 (0:00:19)

again thank you for coming in and giving your perspective okay so I'll just double check there's we're not missing anyone online and I think everyone in Chambers has had opportunities so Council any further questions here before oh sorry go ahead call spread again

Chris Pettingill
0:56:08 (0:00:35)

yeah I just want to follow up on some of the questions and make sure I'm clear were we to approve this variance that would not enable someone to build a new larger home straddling both lots that would require another variance of some sort however there's two lots they could build according to the rs1 regulations on each lot and on lot one in particular they would also have this variance but within that those two separate Lots could be developed as per our regulations is that correct

SPEAKER_10
0:56:44 (0:00:10)

through the mayor these slots would need to be developed as per each slot is a single family

Armand Hurford
0:56:55 (0:00:25)

thank you and I'll pick up the question of the it I I understand we're probably early in the maybe perhaps too early to talk about the bus stop and temporary location that sort of thing but what process would be used to sort of work through that given that the bus stop does need to move and how you know where in the process are we with that or how would that go just to set the expectation for the neighborhood

SPEAKER_10
0:57:20 (0:00:08)

there hasn't been discussion yet but that would need to be dealt with active transportation

Armand Hurford
0:57:29 (0:00:40)

so be subsequent to whatever decision is here because we don't want to get ahead of ourselves on the work is that essentially what's happening yes that's correct okay thank you Council we have a staff recommendation before us and we even provided some options so I'm looking for a mover we need go ahead are you moving the stop recommendations recommendation okay Mr secondary counselor Stoner seconds would to you take speak to it counselor French

John French
0:58:09 (0:00:27)

yes thank you staff for all the work on this in light of um the housing challenges that we have in our community I'm comfortable with setbacks the that are being requested in this development variance permit and for those reasons that's why I'm putting this forward

Armand Hurford
0:58:36 (0:00:01)

thank you counselor stoner

SPEAKER_12
0:58:38 (0:02:23)

thank you to the chair I too will be supporting the motion on the floor which allows for the variance to the exterior side setbacks of both the principal and the accessory building units on lot one I hear and think the community members who have come out and speak this spoken this evening about some of the challenges with the owner of this lot and in particular the comments around the neighborliness is one that I definitely hear and resonates with me but we have few Tools in our toolbox to actually compel a landowner to be neighborly other than having some Stern words in my comments that this is what we do tend to expect of developers and I do hope that they reach out to the neighbors and when there is actually a building permit or a deconstruction permit there will at least be a contact name and number and we do actually have more Tools in our toolbox to be able to regulate what is happening on that site um really I think at the end of the day it matters on who is living in those buildings not necessarily who owns the land so hopefully you can still build strong relations with the folks who decide to live either in those current units or the ones that will be built in the future um speaking to the variances in particular which is what we're here to make a decision about I think it is a very reasonable ask to vary the exterior side setbacks for lot one I think that makes building more feasible on both lots and I think that this is a form of gentle densification within our rs1 neighborhoods that is really necessary for where our community is at in terms of trying to maintain some level of affordability in our community these units themselves probably won't become affordable per se when they are built they will be built at market value but it will provide a diversity of housing forms in a single family otherwise a unique single-family home neighborhood a few weeks ago a staff presented our updated housing needs report that says by 2031 so eight years from now we need 6840 additional housing units simply to maintain income and housing diversity in our community and so there is a lot of need and this is the sort of variants that I think we need to be able to support to provide what will hopefully be one two three four units where there is currently just one and so I'm happy to support the variances requested thank you

Armand Hurford
1:01:02 (0:00:02)

thank you counselor Stoner counselor

Chris Pettingill
1:01:04 (0:01:38)

pettigo yes I will also be supporting this for the reasons spoken about by my colleagues I think one other thing to note is that there is still a floor area ratio and so regardless of variances that sets the maximum size and so the variances and setbacks would require wood on this particular lot create additional encumbrances on the size of a building but even without those it doesn't sort of automatically allow for a larger building we have a maximum house size effectively per lot size and that is maintained that is not being buried here and I do think you know with the incredible need for housing this is what I would consider gentle density there are two lots there it is consistent with our policy to have two single-family homes with Suites on those lots and so I think from my perspective this is consistent with our policy um I I think there are you know we are learning and adjusting I think or thinking about our construction our deconstruction policy we've had some conversations about that and I think those are things definitely to pay attention to um but those are separate from the variants and maintaining noise at a reasonable level and you know issues around construction so we have separate bylaws which are the mechanisms to deal with some of those concerns and so I think we should deal with those with bylaws thank you

Armand Hurford
1:02:43 (0:00:02)

thank you counselor

Andrew Hamilton
1:02:45 (0:01:19)

Hamilton I'll be speaking in support of this development variance permit for many of the reasons same reasons my colleagues are voting in support gentle density is an important thing for our community to increase at least at amount some small rate the of housing we have available when I look at this lot and the host design it the setback is not setting it too far apart of the existing character of the neighborhood as a lot of the houses along Northridge Drive are on similar narrow Lots so I sincerely hope that the neighborliness does improve that is something that's really important but unfortunately something that can't actually be mandated in a meaningful way so I sincerely hope that if the neighbors do find that the construction is not it is causing is being cumbersome that they reach out to make sure that all of the bylaws are being followed thanks

Armand Hurford
1:04:05 (0:05:15)

thank you councilor Hamilton I'm speaking in favor of the of the motion I think this is a an interesting piece when we run into these interior or actually all of our all of our setbacks exterior side setback in this case they seemed some of these regulations work really well when you have a row of flots mid block and you've got the backs the rear set back to the rear set back and you've got the side set back to side set back we start getting into the corner pieces and some of the more interesting corners of our of our community we end up with a Zone there I don't believe the intention of our zoning bottle is ever to sterilize someone's property this is exactly what a variance process is for and this is where to find the places where it makes sense now when I look down this North Northridge this the and I think about standing there with that the built form that's proposed which is a modest size I think that we established about 18 feet is the rough conversion or 5.48 meters width this is a small a small home and the setback is generally in line with the rest of the home if I look down Northridge on that on the side that is being varied in this in this case and I think that goes a long way to fit the spirit of the setbacks in general sense in the neighborhood I do think that you know if there was a proposal for something different that was grouping multiple lots and putting something monstrous there that might be a completely different discussion for all for the neighborhood and most likely for all of us but we do have housing serious housing needs in our community and finding creative ways to work with pieces of property that um uh to realize some positive impact there I think is really important but it's also important to recognize that there are real concerns in the neighbor in actually across the whole Community on where this type of Redevelopment occurs and I think in this case it's met the threshold for me given that it is quite consistent with the setback along Northridge and the mod the modest size of this strike proposed structures or structures is very made me far more comfortable um with this so I'm happy to support as to what happens during demo demolition and construction we do have other regulations that address that and if there are challenges there will be a path to um to have those have those addressed and of course we are also a fallback if that's if those normal channels aren't getting you the result the results but that's a separate discussion I think than what's happening here and on the other lot that isn't subject to the conversation today or the decision today I think you know we do have our normals the rest of our normal zoning applies to that and they can come forward at any time and that's not a decision that comes to the council table when a property is zoned and someone wants to do something fits the zoning that it's these special um cases that come to us so um what happens there is yeah is a separate piece of the of the discussion and you know so with that I'll call the question all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you so much to staff and for everyone that came and provided their um their comments today can we track down our are missing perfect so Council we're as we wait for we will be moving on to the consent agenda but I will just give a bit of space here to make sure that we get we get councilor Greenlaw back well let's do it for counselor green law we do have Quorum and there's not a ton of Correspondence which is usually where the conversation happens so let's sort of press on with the consent agenda oh counselor stoner

- Item 7 - Consent Agenda, Approval of Minutes, Correspondence
1:08:45 (0:01:17)


SPEAKER_12
1:09:20 (0:00:08)

I have to pull the meeting minutes from the special and regular business meeting of April 18th

- Item 9Ai Bylaw First Three Readings and Adoption
1:10:02 (0:18:20)

In the council meeting, Senior Financial Analyst Roland Russell and CFO Heather Boxford presented the 2023 Property Tax Rate Bylaw number 2960. They discussed the tax ratios that the council had requested to be incorporated into the tax bylaw, which included a 2. 5 multiplier for business class six and retaining Light Industry at 3. 8. Due to the capping of Utilities and Port values, the ratios changed slightly, resulting in a slight increase in the burden number for residential and a slight decrease for business.

Russell and Boxford also presented the impacts on various property types, with a 2% increase on average residential, a 0. 4 increase on single-family, 7. 9 on strata, and businesses in the 20 range. Light Industry remained in the low to mid-30s. They highlighted the changes in assessed value year over year, which was 14. 6%, and an 8. 94% increase in revenue requirements. These changes, along with the multipliers, impacted the overall tax rates applied.

Additionally, they discussed the taxes collected for other government entities, with almost two-thirds being municipal taxes and the second-largest portion being school taxes, which are set by the province. The individual rates for General Municipal, Regional Hospital District, and Squamish Lillooet Regional District were also presented. The council members then shared their thoughts on the tax rates and the challenges faced in setting them, emphasizing the need for land use planning and equitable taxation mechanisms.

Armand Hurford
1:09:28 (0:01:30)

so both of those are special and the regular yeah so it's item two and three from that yeah okay sounds good we'll deal with those in the appropriate spot counselor French move the consent agenda with those two excluded okay I'll say I'll second that all in favor motion carries unanimously yeah and then we'll okay all right congratulations Council we've earned ourselves a five minute break thank you everybody okay we're back and we had some technical difficulties getting oh wow concert green law is here and I think the I think the technical difficulties might have been the complications of having you participate from a moon of Jupiter or wherever you are but thank you for good to see you again and we are now on to on to bylaws and we're looking for first three readings for district Squamish 2023 property tax rate bylaw number 2960 2023 and I will turn it over to staff

SPEAKER_01
1:10:59 (0:05:56)

good evening mayor and members of council I have had a little practice this morning so I'm a little quicker at the sharing of the screen Etc today we are sorry my name is Roland Russell I am the senior financial analyst of planning and budgeting with me is our CFO Ms Heather Boxford we are going to speak today on sorry on the bylaw the tax bylaw so we met this morning and at the council meeting this morning Council provided us with the resolution of the various tax ratios that they would like to see incorporated into the tax bylaw and the changes to the ratios that they requested were 2.5 multiplier for business class six and to retain Light Industry at 3.8 what you will also notice if you do a deep dive into some of these figures is that because Utilities in Port are capped the ratios change slightly because the base ratio for the base amount for residential changes and because they're all factors of the residential amount because those values are capped the ratios do change also which may not have been anticipating so with that you will see that we've come out to a number of the burden number for residential is 63 so a slight increase over what was presented earlier today and for business it is 26.3 so a slight decrease from what was presented earlier today we will continue on and show you what the impacts on various excuse me impacts on various property types so in this instance we're looking at a two percent increase on the average residential a modest 0.4 increase on single family 7.9 on strata and businesses in the 20 range and Light Industry doesn't really change it remains you know in the mid low to mid 30s I guess those are the numbers that you requested and so shouldn't really be any surprises here this is pretty much what we suggested would occur this morning oh sorry let me return to this slide this slide gives an overall total amount it shows a comparison of the assessment and the comparison of the revenue generated by class probably the key elements to note here is that the change in assessed value year over year was 14.6 percent we had a 8.94 increase in our Revenue requirements and so with the change in the revenue requirements and change an assessment you're going to have changes in the tax rate we've had some changes in the multipliers and therefore those are also going to impact the overall tax rates that are applied it should be noted and it is within the report that you have that we do not sorry let me phrase that slightly differently in addition to taxes that we collect for ourselves we also collect taxes for other government entities so we want to show you here is this Municipal tax is collected graph and as you can see clearly almost two-thirds of the taxes collected are Municipal Taxes but the second largest portion is for School talks and school tax rates are set by The Province so although Finance staff that man the front desk hear about how much their taxes have gone up related to school that is not a tax that is set by the municipality and you know we are pretty clear in reminding people of that the reason that we put this slide up and we want to show council is that it is it is important to remember that when you set the tax rates for Municipal Taxes you are also within that bylaw incorporating the tax rates for these other services that we have an obligation to collect taxes for okay and with that these are the various individual rates this is what we show in the tax bylaw which is General Municipal Regional Hospital District and the Squamish Regional sorry Squamish lillouette Regional District there are another couple items as were depicted earlier for municipal Finance Association BC assessment school taxes with that we've come to the end of our presentation and if you have any questions we would be happy to answer them

Armand Hurford
1:16:56 (0:00:24)

thank you Council any questions at this point okay then we're looking for the recommendation is first three readings if someone's ready to move that counselor Hamilton moves counselor French seconds to speak to it counselor Hamilton go

Andrew Hamilton
1:17:21 (0:01:14)

ahead yeah thanks this process has been very interesting to me the first time going through and diving into how to build our tax rates it seems to be I don't know if this is a unique year but it seems very interesting to me we seem to even put between sort of a rock and a hard place with the assessed values in different groupings rising or not rising in interesting ways to result in tax rates that what the end user sees for businesses are going to be high what Light Industry sees are going to be high and I think that we've done the best that we can to navigate this these fluctuations in assessed values while not creating too big an impact or at least attempting to minimize or balance the impact across these across our tax painting base so thank you very much for the work you've done doing this calculation three times I think for us four times maybe so thank you

Armand Hurford
1:18:35 (0:00:02)

thank you councilor Hamilton councilor Finch

John French
1:18:37 (0:03:08)

thanks mayor and this is my fifth budget as a counselor and I would categorize it as unique the assessment related to business Commercial properties caught my eye right from the very beginning and I want to thank staff for putting in the extra work um to provide us the background information to get us to where we are today I recognize that it was additional work because in the previous four budget cycles that I've been involved with at the 11th hour we didn't ask for this information so I I'm thinking I have visions of the finance department being hard at work at 1am to put this together for us whether that's the case or not let me pretend um so I want to point out that um this year the average dollar amount for commercial properties the payment will be nine thousand two hundred forty one dollars figure that we just saw a few minutes ago the amount in 2022 was 7 689. 2021 it was 7536 and in 2020 the amount was 7291. skipping back to 2017 it was six thousand three hundred thirty three in a year where commercial properties actually saw a decrease In the comparison to 2016. so while we're seeing a big jump this year when we go back to 2016-2017 we at the commercial property saw a decrease and this is just how our system works there's nothing unusual about any of what I've just said now and I know all this because I did a deep dive over the last couple of days figure if the finance department's up until 1am then I gotta do my homework as