Regular Council - 07 Nov 2023


1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
2: ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3: DELEGATIONS/PETITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
3.i: Economic Abuse Awareness Day
4: CONSIDERATION OF UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
5: PUBLIC HEARINGS
5.i: District of Squamish Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 2011, Amendment Bylaw (Affordable Housing & Public Service) No. 3018, 2023
6: CONSENT AGENDA
6.A: APPROVAL OF MINUTES
6.A: Staff Recommendation:
6.A.i: Special Business Meeting: October 17, 2023
6.A.ii: Regular Business Meeting: October 17, 2023
6.A.iii: Committee of the Whole Meeting: October 24, 2023
6.A.iv: Special Business Meeting: October 24, 2023
6.B: CORRESPONDENCE - Receive for Information
6.B.i: 1020 MP P. Weiler, Re 2023 Enabling Accessibility Fund's (EAF) mid-sized projects component
6.B.ii: 1020 MP P. Weiler, Re 2023 YESS Program Funding Application Open
6.B.iii: 1101 MP P. Weiler, Re October 2023 MP Newsletter
6.B.iv: 1031 Minister of Children and Development, Re Adoption Awareness Month
6.B.v: Undated Mayor A. Hurford Re WLNGs Community Services Infrastructure and Management Plan
6: CORRESPONDENCE - Referred to Staff
6: Staff Recommendation:
6.C: STAFF UPDATES - For Information
6.C.i: 2024-2028 Financial Plan Additional Information
6: END OF CONSENT AGENDA
7: CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
7: Recommendations from the Committee of the Whole: October 24, 2023 10:00am
7.i: West Coast Environmental Law
7.ii: Brennan Park Recreation Centre Phase 1 Retrofit (Grant 1) Update (Validation Report)
7.iii: Innovation Roadmap and Rural Economic Diversification and Infrastructure Program (REDIP) Application
7.iv: Proposed Building Bylaw Update: Energy Step Code 3 / Zero Carbon Step Code 4 Option
8: BYLAWS
8.A: THIRD READING
8.A.i: District of Squamish Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 2011, Amendment Bylaw (Affordable Housing & Public Service) No. 3018, 2023
8.B: ADOPTION
8.B.i: District of Squamish Traffic Bylaw No. 2220, 2012 Amendment Bylaw No. 3019, 2023
8.B:
8.B.ii: District of Squamish Wastewater Treatment Plant Upsize Future Growth Loan Authorization Bylaw No. 2988, 2023
8.B.iii: District of Squamish Jimmy Jimmy (Judd) Slough Loan Authorization Bylaw No. 2989, 2023
8.B.iv: District of Squamish R20 Peninsula Main Arterial Loan Authorization Bylaw No. 2990, 2023
8.B.v: District of Squamish New Firehall No. 2 Loan Authorization Bylaw No. 2991, 2023
9: STAFF REPORTS
9.A: COMMUNITY SERVICES
9.A.i: Finalizing the Green and Inclusive Community Buildings Grant Process
9.B: COMMUNITY PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY
9.B.i: Food Waste Prevention and Diversion - 2023 Application for 2024 Grant Funding
9.C: COMMUNITY PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
9.C.i: Development Permit No. DP000600 – 37781 and 37790 Second Avenue
9.C.ii: Development Permit No. DP000607 – 1050 Finch Dr AP1
9.C.iii: Development Permit No. DP000599 – WLNG
10: BYLAWS
10.A: FIRST THREE READINGS
10.A: DP000600 – 37781 and 37790 Second Avenue
10.A.i: District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (37781 and 37790 Second Ave Market Rental) No.3005, 2023
10.A: Development Permit No. DP000607 – 1050 Finch Dr AP1
10.A.ii: District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (1050 Finch Dr Non-Market Rental) No. 2996, 2023
10.A.iii: District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (1050 Finch Dr Market Rental) No. 2997, 2023
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: Squamish Community Housing Society Grant Application
19: UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
20: OPEN QUESTION PERIOD - CLARIFICATION RELATED TO AGENDA ITEMS
21: COUNCIL OR STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
22: MOTION TO CLOSE
23: TERMINATION
1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
0:00:00 (0:10:14)


Jenna Stoner
0:09:18 (0:00:55)

all right everybody ready here we go I'll call this meeting in order got the thumbs up from Russell thank you very much all right this is a regular business meeting for the District of Squamish for Tuesday November 7th welcome to the traditional territory of the skish people hot squalen skish oo we are pleasa I would like to advise folks that this council meeting is being live streamed and recorded and will be available to the public to view on the districts of Squamish website following the meeting if you do have any concerns about this please notify the corporate officer present at the meeting I'd also like to recognize that we have mayor Herford and councelor Greenlaw online calling in from Japan thank you very much for attending for practical reasons as acting mayor this month I will sit in as chair to help facilitate the

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
0:10:14 (0:00:11)


Jenna Stoner
0:10:14 (0:00:11)

meeting could I please get an adoption of the agenda moved by councelor French seconded by councelor Hamilton all in favor any opposed motion

Economic Abuse Awareness Day
0:10:25 (0:06:10)

The presentation at the District of Squamish council meeting was given by Michaela Meer, the director of policy at the Canadian Center for Women's Empowerment. She joined the meeting virtually from Montreal, Quebec. The center is a national organization based in Ottawa and is one of the only organizations in Canada that specifically works on economic abuse within the context of intimate partner violence and domestic violence. Meer highlighted that economic abuse is a prevalent form of abuse, with research suggesting that almost 95% of domestic abuse survivors also experience economic abuse. Economic abuse is a tactic used by an abusive partner to limit the financial autonomy of the victim, making them dependent and often forcing them to stay in abusive situations.

Meer's organization is working to bring awareness to this issue, particularly during the month of November through their annual "Help Us Rise" campaign. As part of this campaign, they are proclaiming November 26 as Economic Abuse Awareness Day. The aim is to bring attention to this often overlooked issue. The organization is advocating with municipalities, the federal government, and the provincial government to fund more research on this issue, collect data, and address the systemic barriers that many women face when trying to escape economic abuse.

In her presentation, Meer requested the District of Squamish council to proclaim November 26 as Economic Abuse Awareness Day in their municipality. This would help bring awareness about this issue and show solidarity with the survivors in their communities. The council members expressed their support for the motion and thanked Meer for her work and for bringing attention to this important issue.

Jenna Stoner
0:10:25 (0:00:19)

carries and the first item that we have on our agenda this even is a delegation from the economic abuse awareness day and I believe we have Michaela Mayer who's joining us virtually let's bring her

SPEAKER_12
0:10:44 (0:00:04)

up

Jenna Stoner
0:10:49 (0:00:32)

no apparently she is not here we do have some oh she is here now great we'll bring her in hi there Michaela thanks so much for joining us this evening we are now on item three which is a delegation and request for Proclamation for econ economic abuse awareness day so I'll pass it over to you for your presentation or discussion thanks

SPEAKER_01
0:11:21 (0:03:02)

oh thank you so much for having me thank you so much good evening everyone my name is Michaela Meer I go by she her and I am calling in actually from the and the territory of the of many nations amongst them the hona and MOG also known as Montreal Quebec I am the director of policy at the Canadian Center for Women's empowerment which is based in Ottawa we are a National Organization and actually one of the only organizations in Canada that are specifically working on or in the cont text of economic abuse in within intimate partner violence and domestic violence and so yeah it's one of those forms that are is generally acknowledged also in the national action plan to end gender-based violence as form of domestic violence however it's very understudied and a lot of times not very well known even though some of our research suggests that it's like findings are pretty similar to those comp to those in the UK and also in the US that almost 95% of domestic abuse survivors are also experiencing economic abuse so it's a very prevalent form of abuse and what it basically means is that it's basically a tactic by an abusive partner to limit the financial autonomy of someone because of course it's a quite effective way of like cerve controlling Behavior if you limit somebody's access to finances they're very dependent right and can't leave and we hear from women that it's really also one of the main reasons so access to financial resources that women stay in abusive situations and so as our organization we're working a lot on bringing awareness to that topic and specifically during the month of November we have our annual help us rise campaign and we're really wanting to promote an advocate to address economic abuse and part of it is also that we're like procla proclaiming November 26 as economic abuse awareness day to really bring again awareness to that specific issue that is often times overlooked we're advocating with municipalities the federal government the provincial government to really fund more research on that collect data which is currently not being done by statistics Canada and to really address the systemic barriers that a lot of the women are facing when it comes to basically get getting rid of economic abuse so in that sense we're also asking different municipalities to Proclaim November 26 as economic abuse awareness day to bring awareness about this issue and show all your solidarity with the survivors in your communities thank you

Jenna Stoner
0:14:24 (0:00:25)

so much thank you so much Miss Meer for being here bringing attention to this really important issue Council any questions for Miss Meer this evening I'm not seeing any there's a motion for consideration moved by councelor Hamilton seconded by councelor Pettingill would anybody like to speak to it councelor pill go ahead

Chris Pettingill
0:14:50 (0:00:19)

just like to say it's unfortunate that we have to you know consider this sort of resolution but given the opportunity and the need to do so I'm glad that we can support it it's a important work and thank you very much for the work you're doing and happy to support this

SPEAKER_24
0:15:09 (0:00:01)

request

Jenna Stoner
0:15:10 (0:00:07)

thank you Lauren did you pop up in an interest to speak to this motion go ahead

SPEAKER_03
0:15:18 (0:00:19)

I did I've actually been thinking about this recently so I'm going through a subway station right now but because of the affordability crisis that we have in Squamish how many people are stuck in abusive relationships and can't get out so I'm very happy to support this motion on floor yeah thank you so much for all your work thank

SPEAKER_01
0:15:37 (0:00:05)

you really appreciate it means a

Jenna Stoner
0:15:42 (0:00:52)

lot yeah and thank you so much for being here and again raising Awareness on this important issue some of the stats in the submission that you made to Council in advance are really eye openening 84% of victims abusers have built up debt under their names like to out from under that is crippling for somebody who is already trying to overcome the emotional and physical abuse of a relationship to then try and restart on a financial Edge is just so overwhelming especially as councelor green law mentioned in a time and place where the cost of living is so high especially in Squamish we know that this is particularly poignant in our community so happy to support the motion on the floor I will call the question because we have two folks online I'll just call for those opposed motion carries unanimous thank you very much thanks again miss Meer for being here thank you so

CONSIDERATION OF UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
0:16:35 (0:06:20)

In the council meeting, a member of the public named Malika from the Highlands came forward to discuss the Wood Fiber development permit. She represented the organization 'See the Sky' and expressed concerns about the permit, particularly in relation to light pollution and its potential impact on local wildlife and ecosystems. Malika requested that the council refer the matter back to staff for further public review before the permit is considered, due to the significant public interest and ongoing opposition to the Wood Fiber LNG project. She stated that more time was needed to review the permit application, identify concerns, and understand the process and limitations that the council has with regard to the permit.

Council member Jenna Stoner thanked Malika for her submission and clarified that the council's decision at this point was whether they were willing to entertain a hearing on the matter at this time. She noted that it was not their typical practice to receive public input on development permits unless there was a request for a variance, which was not the case here. However, she stated that the decision was ultimately up to the council's discretion.

Council members Andrew Hamilton and John French both expressed their belief in maintaining the council's normal procedures for development permits, which do not typically include public hearings or speaking opportunities. They acknowledged the importance of the work that 'See the Sky' was doing, but emphasized the importance of keeping procedures consistent. Council member Chris Pettingill expressed some uncertainty, noting that the request seemed to be more about understanding the guidelines and identifying inconsistencies, which he saw as different from the public's perception of a project. Despite this, the motion to deny the request to hear from the public on the Wood Fiber DP was seconded and carried unanimously.

Jenna Stoner
0:16:35 (0:00:25)

much next on our agenda is consideration of unscheduled public attendance that is anybody who is here who has a matter that they think is urgent and cannot wait two weeks and would like to speak to Council on that matter please come forward to the podium provide your name the neighborhood in which you're here and the reason why you think your matter is urgent

SPEAKER_23
0:17:00 (0:00:21)

hello my name is Malika and I'm coming from the highlands and I'm here speaking from my see the sky and was hoping to speak I don't know if I do that now or later on the wood fiber development permit that's being discussed tonight

Jenna Stoner
0:17:21 (0:00:15)

so this is your opportunity to express to council what it is that you'd like to speak about and why you think it needs to be discussed at this meeting okay so not the actual content of what it is that you're trying to present and then Council will vote on whether they will hear that this evening or at a later date

SPEAKER_23
0:17:37 (0:00:45)

okay hoping to ask Council to refer this back to staff to allow for more time for public review before the permit is considered given the significant public interest in Wood fiber LNG and the ongoing opposition to it upon initial review we're concerned about the light pollution and the impact on nearby wildlife and ecosystems and we believe this deserves more attention and oversight but we would need more than a day to review the permit application identify concerns and understand this process and the limitations that Council has with the regard to the permit

Jenna Stoner
0:18:22 (0:00:55)

yeah thank you for making your submission thank you for speaking I know it is not always the most welcoming location to come up and speak so thank you for being here Council so this is regarding item let's see if I have my numbers right 9c3 the development permit DP 00 599 for wood fiber L and our decision at this point is whether we are willing to entertain hearing on this matter for the DP at this time this evening it is not our typical practice to receive public input on DPS there's no requirement for a Vari or no request for a variance here so just keep that in mind but it is at council's pleasure you would yeah go ahead councelor

Andrew Hamilton
0:19:18 (0:00:47)

Hamilton I'd like to make the difficult this recommendation that we keep in line with our normal hearing our normal procedure for development permits in that we do not have an opportunity for public hearing or public speaking for a development permit I do absolutely understand the importance of the work that myc sky is doing and absolutely congratulate like admire you for coming here and requesting but I think that it is it is important that we keep our procedures in line with our with what we regularly do thanks

Jenna Stoner
0:20:06 (0:00:00)

go ahead councelor

Chris Pettingill
0:20:07 (0:00:41)

pangel yeah I guess I'm a little bit torn here I understand what my colleague is saying I guess the request here though or it sounds like to me is to look at or give it sounds like the focus is on you know the public to understand the DPA guidelines and identify areas of inconsistency there which is a bit different than just sort of Public's perception of a project like we'll have with the public hearing and so that's where I'm struggling a little bit there's a bit of a gray area

Jenna Stoner
0:20:48 (0:00:11)

there so I did hear the general skeleton of emotion that came from councelor Hamilton would you like to refine that and we get a

Andrew Hamilton
0:21:00 (0:00:12)

second okay so I will clarify the motion that we deny the request to hear from the public on the wood fiber DP this evening's wood fiber

Jenna Stoner
0:21:13 (0:00:07)

DP seconded by councelor French would anybody else like to speak to it this evening go ahead councelor French

John French
0:21:20 (0:00:43)

thanks chair and normally I I'm a big fan of hearing unschedule public attendance when Brave folks come before us and make the request and in this particular case I'm supporting the motion because we have a procedure bylaw and we have a traditional way of develop or handling development permits and tonight I don't wish to deviate from that I support our procedure bylaw I support the way we handle DPS and while I wish I could hear from the delegation I think it's more important for me to support this

Jenna Stoner
0:22:04 (0:00:51)

motion thank you I will also be supporting the motion on the floor we have received written correspondents from my sky as well as a few others with respect to this DP as mentioned it's not our typical procedure to allow folks to speak if there's no variance if there's a variance or some other sort of leeway in terms of the discretion that Council has with respect to a development permit then it's typical that we would open that opportunity but the reality is that we have very limited discretion on what's before us this evening and so I don't want to give false Impressions on where we actually have the opportunity to provide or respond to public comment with that I will call to question any opposed motion carries unanimously thank you any other requests for consideration of unscheduled public attendance this evening not seeing any

PUBLIC HEARINGS
0:22:55 (0:41:52)

The District of Squamish council meeting discussed a public hearing for the District of Squamish zoning bylaw Number 220 2011 Amendment bylaw affordable housing and public service number 3018 2023. The purpose of the public hearing was to allow the public to present and provide submissions to the council regarding the proposed bylaws. The bylaws aim to remove density limitations for affordable housing projects from the zoning bylaw, allowing them to be more feasibly established across the community. The bylaw also proposes to replace section 4. 49 in the general regulations section of the zoning bylaw with a new general regulation related to affordable housing.

Brian Daly, a planner with Community Planning, presented the affordable housing and public service zoning bylaw amendments for public hearing. He explained that based on provincial targets identified in the District of Squamish 2023 housing needs report, 9600 new housing units will be required in Squamish by 2036, 42% of which will need to be affordable to households earning below $70,000 a year. The proposed bylaw 3018 aims to increase the supply of affordable housing by removing density limitations, allowing for the height of a building where all of the units are secured as affordable housing to increase to 23 meters or six stories, exempting affordable housing buildings from lot coverage, and applying a parking requirement of one space per dwelling unit for affordable housing units.

Daly also noted that the amendments proposed as part of bylaw 2976 have been included as part of this bylaw. These include a revised definition of Public Service to include services provided by the provincial or federal government and includes affordable housing provided by a government agency or nonprofit agency. The amendment also proposes to add neighborhood commercial as an accessory use in the P2 Zone. The intention behind the amendments included in bylaw 3018 is to remove density limitations in the zoning bylaw and eliminate the rezoning process that is often required for these projects, which could save six months to a year in the development process and allow for affordable rental projects to be delivered to the market faster.

Jenna Stoner
0:22:55 (0:02:26)

all right we will move on to item five on our agenda which is a public hearing this is for district of sish zoning bylaw Number 220 2011 Amendment bylaw affordable housing public service number 3018 2023 as staff gets set up I will read my very long script here this public hearing is being held pursuant to the Local Government Act requirements to allow public to present and to provide submissions to council respecting the proposed bylaws that is District of Squamish zoning bylaw Number 220 2011 Amendment bylaw affordable housing and public service number 3018 2023 everyone present will be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard or provide a written submission we want to ensure that no one is discouraged or prevented from making their views known whether speaking in favor or against the proposed zoning Amendment please ensure that your remarks are relevant to the matters contained in the proposed bylaw please note that the public hearing is not an opportunity for members of the public to have their questions answered by staff or councel any questions or points of clarification can be directed to staff by contacting the planning department directly members of council may ask clarifying questions following presentations council is here to listen and will not debate the merits of the proposed bylaw with the public or each other during the public hearing please note that this public hearing is being recorded and webstream live and the recording will be posted the district website media are often present at public hearings hey Andrew and the public should feel free to advise the media if they don't want their picture taken up to and as part of this hearing the public has had the opportunity to make submissions to council if any submissions were received they are available to for review and comment and have been included as part of staff's report any sub received after the agenda was published have been added to the electronic agenda and to the electronic public hearing package available on the district website any submissions made during the hearing can be reviewed during the hearing by viewing the electronic agenda and submissions will be uploaded by staff as they are received we are trying to make this hearing a safe space for everyone to voice their opinion without interference from others therefore I ask the members of the public maintain order and quiet during the hearing please do not applaud or interrupt any speech or actions of members of council or any other person addressing Council I will now turn it over to the planning department and Mr Daly to outline the bylaw that is being

SPEAKER_09
0:25:22 (0:07:01)

proposed thank you chair good evening mayor and Council my name is Brian Daly planner with Community planning and I'm here tonight to present the affordable housing and public cerice zoning bylaw amendments for public hearing at the October 17th 2023 regular council meeting Council gave bylaw 3018 first and second reading and scheduled a public hearing for this evening based on provincial targets identified in the district of Squamish 2023 housing needs report 9600 new housing units will be required in Squamish by 2036 6840 of these will be required by 20 2031 of those 680 6840 units 42% will need to be affordable to households earning below $70,000 a year one way to increase Supply is to remove density limitations for affordable housing projects from the zoning bylaw so they could more viably be established across the community bylaw 3018 proposes to replace section 4.49 in the general regulations Section of the zoning bylaw with a new general regulation related to affordable housing these General regul ation would allow for affordable housing in any Zone where residential is a principal use allow for the height of a building where all of the units are secured as affordable housing to increase to 23 MERS or six stories exempt affordable housing buildings from loot coverage apply a parking requirement of one space per dwelling unit for affordable housing units amend section 4.25 which regulates gross floor area calculation to exempt gross floor area used for affordable housing from that calculation and separately there's an amendment proposed to the general regulations regarding height of buildings and structures to apply a maximum Building height of 26.5 M or eight stories whichever is less in any Zone that may permit a taller Building height as this is the currently the tallest building height that the District of Squamish fire department can safely fight a fire in as noted on the screen there are a few zones where that would be relevant staff included conditions of use clarifying that affordable housing use and public service use is not permitted at densities higher than existing zoning if the property is located in a debris flow Hazard area restricted densification area or limited densification area an additional condition is included to clarify that affordable housing use and public service use on a property located in a conditional densification area is permitted if the specific conditions identified in the ocp are met these conditions have been brought into the zoning bylaw amend Amendment number 3018 for clarity the Amendments proposed as part of bylaw 2976 which were formerly noted as the P2 Amendments have been included as part of this bylaw these include the a revised definition of Public Service to include Services provided by the provincial or federal government and includes affordable housing provided by a government agency or nonprofit agency the amendment also proposes to add neighborhood commercial as an accessory use in the P2 Zone staff as or Council asked for some visualizations from staff to attempt to illustrate what these proposed amendments may look like on a typical rs1 lot it would require upwards of six typical rs1 lots to be Consolidated to accommodate the required parking for 40 unit building a building with fewer than 40 units would not likely require the maximum 23 meter height in discussion with in discussions with the Squamish Community Housing Society afford affordable housing developments under six stories do not typically receive financing as they do not contain enough units to make the project financially viable as an example the spirit Creek affordable housing building which opened in 2023 has 76 units and is five stories in height this was constructed on a 5,300 square meter parcel which would be roughly the equivalent area of eight typical rs1 Lots given the current market value of rs1 Zone properties it is unlikely that an affordable rental housing project would be acquiring multiple rs1 lots and taking advantage of the relaxations proposed in this Zing bylaw Amendment the intention behind the Amendments included in bylaw 3018 are to remove density limitations in the zoning bylaw and eliminate the rezoning process that is often required for these projects this could save six months to a year in the development process and allow for affordable rental projects to be delivered to the market faster the blanket resoning for residential zones to allow for viable affordable housing projects will provide a sign significant advantage to nonprofits and government agencies in delivering affordable housing in any Squamish neighborhood planning staff held an open house on the proposed affordable housing amendments for the general public on September 20th 2023 for clarity these this was on the previous amendment that didn't include the conditions related to flood Hazard and debr flow Hazard that's the only difference between these bylaw amendments this event was well attended approximately 20 St members of the public were in attendance staff outlined the proposed amendments and Associated rationale and took clarifying questions from the public then allowed for an open discussion to occur the majority of those in attendance were property owners who agreed there is a need for affordable housing but were concerned about the neighborhood impacts associated with allowing buildings up to six stories with a reduced parking standard in all residential zones overall the conversation was productive and informative for staff and attendees staff clarified that the amendments were targeting publicly funded non-market rental projects and are relying on the district's Partnerships with community housing providers to resolve location and massing issues rather than restricting development through zones Zing attendees highlighted the need for clarity in communicating with the public to highlight the objectives of this amendment there were a number of concerns that the public highlighted including the impact of six-story buildings on adjacent properties including shade and effect on neighborhood character effect on property values and setting a precedent for Building height in a low density neighborhood concerns regarding excess parking from the future residential buildings whether existing infrastructure has the capacity for this type of development concerns around a blanket of zoning Amendment approach as opposed to spot zoning in certain locations to try out the regulations and ensure there are no unintended consequences there were also a number of attendees who were supportive of the Amendments including one resident who felt that they should provide further relaxations to make these developments as viable as possible notice of the public hearing was advertised in the October 26th and November SEC second editions of the Squamish Chief newspaper six I believe six or seven comments were received prior to the public hearing this evening two were supportive of the Amendments the one suggested that the relaxation should go further the remainder of the comments were not supportive of the proposed amendments so following the public hearing staff recommend that bylaw be 3018 be given third reading and that concludes my presentations I'm happy to take questions at this

Jenna Stoner
0:32:24 (0:02:07)

time thank you for the presentation Mr Dy I'll go to council first if Council has any questions at this point in time we have seen this a few times and so not seeing any clarifying questions so we'll now move to an opportunity to be to hear from the public and so the P the public will be given an opportunity to make to speak and make their submissions I do have a list of names here and I will call on those individuals at to the pod ium first after these speakers I'll call for any other interested parties to speak and then you simply need to 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 please note that speakers will be given up to five minutes to address counil in order that everyone has an opportunity to speak to counsel but if you run out of time in your five minutes and you want to come up and speak again you're more than welcome to details to participate via telephone or WebEx are displayed on the screen for those who have logged in from your computers or are watching the live stream of the meeting instructions are also included on the district website to get on the speakers list if you've joined by telephone please raise your hand by dialing star three or if you're on WebEx on a computer or cell phone app by opening the participant panel and by clicking on the hand icon please note that there will be a moderator who will communicate with speakers when it is your turn to speak you'll receive a voice prompt by a telephone or a dialogue box Bo via WebEx please remember to put your hand down after you have finished speaking again that star three on the telephone or by clicking the hand icon on WebEx so that we know that you have completed your comments if you have already spoken and then you wish to speak again to provide more or new comments you can raise your hand again or add your name to the speakers list and once I've indicated that all speakers have been offered a chance to speak then we can come back around so I will begin the first person on my list is Toby Ford Kelsey if you could come up make your comments name residential

SPEAKER_12
0:34:31 (0:00:12)

neighborhood good morning mayin Japan and good evening everybody else I'm Toby Ford Kelsey currently living in Crumpet Woods was there something else I was supposed to say

SPEAKER_24
0:34:43 (0:00:00)

you've got it

SPEAKER_12
0:34:44 (0:05:25)

so I presented a I wrote a submission which is in the agenda or whatever it is I hope it's self-explanatory but I'll just I just want to work through it briefly because I think it's maybe more nuanced than some of the arguments people would present in relation to this my generally when I look at things the council are doing I look for kind of economic literacy and I feel that there are aspects of this which are kind of economically illiterate if I understand correctly What's Happening Here is an exception to the normal the kind of Norm of Municipal Behavior so normally people come to a town they buy property they hopefully look at the Zoning for the property they're buying and they have some expectation of what the future will hold for the neighborhood they've bought into and when a municipality rezones which is a very dramatic thing to do to allow density or something else then there's usually some economic impact for the people in that neighborhood there will be some adverse effect that maybe they don't want you know larger buildings around them but on the other hand they may have the opportunity to sell their properties at higher at a higher price and that's kind of a compensatory thing and that is that is the normal run of Municipal life as I understand it maybe somebody will contradict me but that's to me what I understand to be normal what's happening in this case is you propose to create a sing an exemption for a par one particular buyer so you are creating an exemption for I get I assume kind of nonprofits it's not kind of unclear to me what the entities are that will be buying but they will be buying with the intention of creating these very large affordable housing properties and necessarily and I hope this is clear in the presentation they will be looking for land that is low in value because they're trying to build affordable housing they're for they're trying to keep their costs as low as possible so the neighborhoods that are going to be built on for affordable housing are necessarily the lower land price neighborhoods in score mesh they're going to be places like Valley Cliff or dentville I thought brackendale but now I see brackendale has kind of a flood exemption or something but again maybe I didn't understand that properly but it seems to me the neighborhoods that going to be affected by this are the same neighborhoods where typically the people who bought there are firsttime single family home buyers people who maybe owned a townhouse before or lived somewhere else in BC or some circumstance that just allowed them to buy a single family home and maybe they've you know struggled a lot to get to that point you know maybe they've spent a long time saving to the Gap Point they've bought a property of that type and now they find themselves in a neighborhood which is changing character but there's no offsetting benefit to them they're not going to see land values Rising because you are restricting this to a single type of buyer so they are going to see their neighborhood change and in some cases people are probably going to feel that their very specific location is blighted by having a five-story or six-story I I've lost track eight story building put next to them and then in fact not only will they not see land prices go up but most likely people are specifically in that Circ an we'll see their house price drop dramatically so where this isn't of course going to happen is in the nicer parts of you know what are perceived as a nicer parts of town you know the benchlands the you know University Heights G galdi Highlands trumpet words for I currently live you know these are not areas that going to be affected because land prices are higher so essentially this is regressive this is a regressive policy and I and I think it's unfair I think if you want to do this and I mean there are arguments for and against density but if you want to do this it should just be done across the board it should be for all classes of buyer like people anybody who wants to build density should be given that opportunity and that and then that is fair that's a fair playing field and that's fair on the people who Fair on homeowners who've taken the risk On This Town I just add a couple of that's what I hope I've said i' I've rephrased what I wrote but I hope that conveys what I what I wrote I just want to add a couple of other points quickly it seems seconds yeah first one I think this will this kind of proposal will be gained by people I think people will find what the suggestion was this probably wouldn't happen in a lot of neighborhoods because it wouldn't be affordable I think people will find ways to game it in some way they'll find a way around there'll be loopholes there'll be ways to do this and secondly the province has just in the last few days made announcements like this but as far as I understand it opening density up to all kinds of buyers it seems to me you should scrap this proposal entirely until you've really looked at what the provence is proposing and bringing your proposal in line with theirs thank you

Jenna Stoner
0:40:10 (0:00:07)

thank you for your submission we'll go to the next person on my list is David lassman please come

SPEAKER_19
0:40:17 (0:03:03)

up yes my name is David lassman I live in brackendale I have just a couple of short comments to make I like the phrase that Sarah Ellis used which is non-market housing I think that's more genuine than calling it affordable housing experiences in other areas for example cities like Chicago have found that is it is best not to concentrate how housing projects in a single area so it would be better if you're going to have these kind of projects that they should be dispersed throughout the community and not centered in one area for me common Den common decency would require a buffer between an existing home and one of these kind of projects I don't I don't see these things being addressed by this bylaw but it may be covered in some other bylaw so what this is really about is actually really a global issue which is all around the world governments are trying to find a way to build housing for people who can't afford housing that's what that's what this is really about and so if you have a problem and you want to find a real solution to that problem right you have to find out what's the cause of the problem what's the real source of the problem and so I would like to bring to your attention a couple of questions which are not really being addressed anywhere in the in on the TV or in public right first why is housing expensive why is it so expensive what are the what are the costs involved it would be nice to see a pie chart showing what percentage of a typical unit in Squamish is you know for the foundation what percentage is for land and so on and so forth what percentage of the cost is for dealing with the district's bylaws and so on so why is housing expensive like a crucial question the other related question is why can families no longer afford fundamental Necessities like food and housing this is really the Crux of the matter it's a global issue it's not just Squamish or BC or Canada so those are my comments thank you very

Jenna Stoner
0:43:21 (0:00:11)

much thank you Mr lman for your submission this evening next on my on my list is Jerry lejo please come

SPEAKER_21
0:43:32 (0:01:18)

out hi yes I'm Jerry ljo and I live in wesle I have a question which I know won't be answered tonight but hopefully eventually would be the affordable housing that the new or the Amanda bylaw would allow will it allow for buildings in which all of the UN units are public service housing and as well buildings in which only a portion of the units or a percentage of the units are public service housing so I'm thinking you know a building that is where all the units are affordable housing or public service housings subsidized by province federal or the municipality Squamish Housing Authority or something along the lines of the anthem development on Centennial where there are 22 units that will be listed as afford or held as affordable housing in perpetuity according to the wage scale that you've got in the schedule on that permit so that's basically my question is it just for public service housing or for developments that have that include a small or some percentage of Public Service housing thank

Jenna Stoner
0:44:51 (0:00:15)

you thank you for your submission we will do two more and then we'll go to council for any clarifying questions the next person on my list is Kirby Brown pleas come

SPEAKER_08
0:45:06 (0:03:06)

up Kirby Brown of brackendale thank you mayor and Council for hearing my comments and the thoughtful comments before me I am the chair of Squamish community housing or housing Squamish and I'm speaking tonight in support of the bylaw the amend amended bylaws as I think the previous speakers mentioned directly or indirectly creating affordable housing may have already escaped us but creating a sufficient supply of housing so that in the future Generations won't have the same struggles that our community is facing today is what's important council is limited in the tools that they can exercise they don't own a lot of land but you do have the ability to make amendments such as the one tonight that reduce costs for very specific uses on land which is I think a very thoughtful amendment I think it's well bounded by the community policies that exist today that make sure that all developments on any property reflect the zoning the riparians and the uses and purposes of the neighborhoods within which they're built so I have no fears about lots of these buildings popping up in neighborhoods and shading other structures what I think it does is clearly signals to senior government that Squamish it town that is committed to trying to do what it can to solve a very complicated problem and that signaling in and of itself is very worthwhile coming back to the bylaw Amendment you know we do need to look at broad Strokes that allow us to take advantage of opportunities when and if they present themselves and I have no illusion that there's going to be a lot of these developments available given the restrictions that exist within the policies of this community that are in place to protect us from Runaway and rampant development of all kinds but it is the type of opportunity that we may live in now meaning that currently there's an affordability crisis recognized by all levels of government and all levels of government are stepping forward to add what they can bylaw amendments zoning considerations and at the more senior levels of government funding new funds are being created it seems like every day but they're and they are of substance but we are competing against every other community in this country for federal funds and every other community in this province for provincial funds and to be able to stand up a not for-profit society that can go after these funds with rapidity and confidence that the district and the municipality is behind us in a meaningful way will allow us to go and access those funds that close the gap between unattainable and some approximation of affordability if we're going to get housing built we need bylaws and we need money and one comes with the other so I applaud this effort I think it's thoughtful and well considered so thank you for your time and attention

Jenna Stoner
0:48:12 (0:00:11)

thank you Mr Brown for your submission this evening next on my list is Cameron

SPEAKER_20
0:48:24 (0:01:17)

cop good evening my name is Cameron cop I live here in downtown Squamish with my family I come to you today as a director of the Squamish Community Housing Society a local Builder and a Community member from these lenses I see the importance of this bylaw this byw presents a significant opportunity in doing so it allows us to ensure we maintain a diverse Community into the future which I think we all agree is important at the Housing Society we're working on creating new affordable housing it's just really tricky I've read the bylaw and I believe it's going to help I can tell you that having this bylaw in place will make it easier to gain project support acquire funding and ultimately create more affordable housing for the people of Squamish affordable housing belongs anywhere where the fundamentals of building work to build it for the first time in decades the federal and provincial governments are providing funds that are now becoming available it's important that the district's development approval process is aligned with the needs and go of governments nonprofits and other partners to deliver affordable housing this is why I urge you to give this bylaw third reading tonight thank

Jenna Stoner
0:49:41 (0:00:12)

you thank you Mr cope for your submission this evening we'll take a little pause to go to council to see if there's any clarifying questions at this point and then we'll go back to out to the public councelor French go

John French
0:49:53 (0:00:31)

ahead thanks chair and I wonder if staff could address thought that we had a few moments ago about whether or not this move will allow for buildings with only a portion of government subsidies that are driven by a private developer and I think I heard in your presentation words that answer the question so maybe you could just give us a context

SPEAKER_24
0:50:25 (0:00:01)

go ahead Mr Dy

SPEAKER_09
0:50:26 (0:00:34)

yeah through the chair so it would it wouldn't prohibit developments where affordable housing is being proposed if there's only a portion of the units that are secured as affordable housing they wouldn't be eligible to get the height relaxations or lot coverage relaxations they would only be exempt from gross floor area calculations and they would get a parking relaxation depending on the unit type so it has to be 100% of the units in a building has to be secur as affordable rental to secure all of those relaxations that are proposed

John French
0:51:01 (0:00:01)

thanks

Jenna Stoner
0:51:02 (0:00:14)

chair Council any further questions at this point I had one just on following on councelor frenches can you just clarify what our definition is of

SPEAKER_09
0:51:17 (0:00:54)

affordable let me just pull up the Bas so I get it my apologies one moment

Jenna Stoner
0:52:11 (0:00:01)

I have another question so maybe yeah

SPEAKER_09
0:52:13 (0:00:02)

you GNA sorry it's loading I thought I had it in here

Jenna Stoner
0:52:15 (0:00:17)

but it's all good I'll ask I'll ask you another question maybe Mr vincus can pull up the zoning bylaw definition of affordable housing my other question is I just want to ensure that even with these zoning changes our DP guidelines and things like setbacks would still apply correct

SPEAKER_09
0:52:32 (0:00:01)

that's correct

Jenna Stoner
0:52:33 (0:00:10)

so in terms of how we would the interface of buildings with neighboring buildings Frontage improvements all those things would still be

SPEAKER_09
0:52:44 (0:00:16)

required development permit for the farm character of the building would still be required so obviously the building would have to meet all of the relevant DPA guidelines and when a building permit is submitted it triggers these subdivision and development control bylaw which would be the opportunity for Frontage improvements and things like that

Jenna Stoner
0:53:00 (0:00:22)

okay thank you and then one further piece of clarification that I think there may have been some confusion so that the proposal includes an amendment to the definition of Public Service to include affordable housing under that public service definition but it's not necessarily A descriptor of who would be in the affordable housing units is that correct

SPEAKER_09
0:53:23 (0:00:04)

that's correct it's tied to it being provided by nonprofit or government

Jenna Stoner
0:53:27 (0:00:02)

agency thank you very much

SPEAKER_09
0:53:30 (0:00:31)

I have the definition of affordable housing up now so it's defined as non-market and core needs housing available at rental rates and purchase prices below Market rates and prices to those of low and moderate incomes that is subject to housing agreement between the district and a land owner pursuant to the Local Government Act that has some form of occupancy restrictions Andor the rent or Price charge to the occupant for the unit and is more clearly detailed in the in an affordable housing policy or a bylaw approved by

Jenna Stoner
0:54:01 (0:00:03)

Council thank you for the definition councelor Pettingill go

Chris Pettingill
0:54:05 (0:00:17)

ahead yeah I'm wondering if any consideration was given or why you know we don't see a suggestion to further reduce or remove parking restrictions for such proposals that would be downtown or on a key Transit Road or

SPEAKER_09
0:54:22 (0:00:35)

something through the chair staff thought it would given that this is going to be blanket zoning across the entire community staff thought it was appropriate to reduce the parking standard to one stall per unit and then allow the opportunity for a development variance permit to further reduce the parking if necessary as a DP would be required for this form of development so if for example the project was located in an area that you described and there is sufficient rationale to further reduce the parking staff thought it would be appropriate to deal with that on a case-by Case basis through the variance process

Jenna Stoner
0:54:58 (0:00:08)

thank you not seeing any further questions from Council at this point I'll go to our moderator and see if we have anybody

SPEAKER_04
0:55:06 (0:00:05)

online thank you chair there are people online nobody has their hand raised at this

Jenna Stoner
0:55:12 (0:00:39)

point so just a reminder for those folks who are online or if you're calling in by telephone it's star three to raise your virtual telephone hand or open the participant dialogue box and raise your online virtual full hand if you'd like to submit during this public hearing otherwise I'll go back out to anybody in the audience who's here joining us this evening if you haven't yet spoken and you'd like to speak to the bylaw that's under consideration we'll go ihor first please come forward yeah please state your name and the neighborhood in which you're coming from this evening

SPEAKER_18
0:55:51 (0:00:58)

my name is ehor zbc I live in the galdi high Islands one of the things that I find has been perhaps overlooked in this process is the melding of owned units and rental units in the same building and the reason that I suggest that is because what it does is it raises the Spectre of I don't want to buy in this building because there's going to be rentals and they're going to be rentals to people who can't afford rentals in normal building now I don't share that particular view but developers do so how do we amarate that how do we make a developer feel like my market rent my market value in this project isn't going to be diminished in any way by being forced to have rental units in that building thank you

SPEAKER_24
0:56:50 (0:00:00)

thank you for your

Jenna Stoner
0:56:51 (0:00:10)

submission this evening gentleman in the back in the black please come forward your name and

SPEAKER_11
0:57:01 (0:01:03)

neighborhood hello my name is Jonathan Norton I live in valleycliffe I think that what I have to say Echoes a lot of what the first gentleman said this evening I think that the blanket nature of this legislation is a bit of a knee-jerk reaction and I don't think it's justified in being applied across all of Squamish I think that if would be wise to make some initial steps to test and see how this legislation affects things and I do not believe that it is integrated well in how the city of Squamish will be planned going forward I think that it introduces an element of chaos that just doesn't add up I think we've seen this with some of the developments that have gone on in downtown itself so there are examples that already exist of this add that to the already crammed nature of our roads which are not ready to support increased density and I think we have a recipe for not the best things to happen so those are my thoughts and I will leave it at

SPEAKER_24
0:58:05 (0:00:03)

that thank you for your submission this

Jenna Stoner
0:58:08 (0:00:08)

evening would anybody else like to speak the bylaw please come forward gentleman in the black jacket then we'll go to the gentleman in the

SPEAKER_00
0:58:17 (0:02:12)

blue all right thank you Council my name is Chad Hooper I live in North yards I just listening to the SU suggestions of a reduction in parking and it feels like we're putting the cart before the horse here I mean we live in Squamish and we don't have a much of a transit system in place and I mean myself I lived in a quiet little culdesac in North yard so now we've got rental units that have gone up where the forest was and the previous Council approved a height limit in the parking for 6'6 which doesn't fit the most popular vehicle in swam is 6' 7 so now our quiet culdesac is a parking lot there's also retail spaces it's a mixed use building which I get that makes sense but there was no hor I put into the parking for those retail locations so we're dealing with dangerous situations all the time where people are blocking the intersection and you know it's an industrial area west of the train tracks there so people come racing down there late for their shift at 7 in the morning I'll be taking my daughter to her swimming lesson or trying to and several times have almost been wiped out by somebody racing down there because you can't see them coming because of all the cars parked where they shouldn't be I've talked to several of the tenants of the place and ask them you know if they because they do tend to park for days on end and it's tough to get bylaws to do anything about it in a timely manner and have talk to them and they say well you know it's $100 for a parking spot and they don't want to pay that so it's like well okay so anyways it's just frustrating because we're stuck dealing with it and sort of I get the idea behind less parking it's a great idea but we don't have the services in place to support less parking and Squamish is a community that needs vehicles to get around right now unfortunately if it was nice all the time we could always ride bikes would be great but we get a lot of rain we get a lot of winter and it makes it hard thank

Jenna Stoner
1:00:29 (0:00:06)

you thank you for your submission this evening yes please come forward

SPEAKER_24
1:00:36 (0:00:01)

your name and your

SPEAKER_14
1:00:37 (0:00:47)

neighborhood Hi H my name is jimy Morel I live in Valley cleff I'm here representing just myself speaking and support of this bylaw we desperately need housing of all types but affordable housing especially and I'm heartened by this effort at removing the overhead and uncertainty of spot resoning and allowing these developments to get started as quickly as possible building affordable housing is certainly difficult and complicated and perming should be as predictable and streamlined as possible with legislation likely coming from the province allowing for Plex construction and all single family home neighborhoods I think the forms that the Spy allows on existing rs1 Lots will fit in well with that new legislation and is very forward-looking and I would echo counselor Pettingill and urge counselor to explore going further reducing or removing parking requirements to help make as many of these projects as viable as possible thank you

Jenna Stoner
1:01:25 (0:00:06)

thank you for your submission this evening I'll go back to the moderator and just see if there's anybody who's raised their hand

SPEAKER_04
1:01:31 (0:00:04)

online thank you chair no one online has their hand raised

Jenna Stoner
1:01:35 (0:00:19)

thank you anybody else in the audience like to speak at this time Council any further questions of clarification not seeing any yeah counselor Pettingill

Chris Pettingill
1:01:55 (0:00:30)

so we did have a question about sort of impacts or the tension between Market ownership and rental in a in one of these buildings As I understood it but am I correct in thinking that this is proposed solely for below market and so a tension between market and non-market would not exist in these

SPEAKER_09
1:02:25 (0:00:05)

that's

Jenna Stoner
1:02:30 (0:02:16)

correct any further questions anybody else in the audience like to speak this evening all right I have a closing statement and we'll see how this goes so if there are no further speakers I would ask Council if there are any further information that the planning department might provide in response to any comments or questions raised by members of the public at this point not seeing any now that I have heard from everyone on the speakers list and those who have raised their hands it is a requirement that I ask three times if there is anyone else who wishes to speak before we can close this public hearing this evening for the first time is there anyone else who wants to speak or make a submission this evening for a second time is there anyone else who wants to speak or make a submission this evening for those online star three or raise your hand in the panelist icon in WebEx just trying to stall here before I ask for a third time still not seeing anyone online Robin NOP for a third and final time is there anyone else who wants to speak or make a submission this evening not seeing any so with no further submissions please note that council members are not permitted to receive any further submissions or hear either a proponent or opponent to the zoning or to the application once the public hearing has been concluded this means we can't speak to you out in the community or receive emails or phone calls on any of these bylaws until a decision on the bylaws has been made any and all communication from this point must be channeled to staff directly please if there are no further speakers I declare the hearing closed thank you very much everyone for coming this evening and for your submissions all right Council I will move us along we will consider third reading of that bylaw later on in the agenda but we'll continue with the agenda as we have it in front of us because it's not too far

CONSENT AGENDA
1:04:47 (0:00:23)


Jenna Stoner
1:04:47 (0:00:23)

down so next up is the consent agenda would anybody like to remove anything from the consent agenda not seeing anybody want to remove anything from the consent agenda no would anybody like to move the consent agenda as is moved by councelor French seconded by councelor Hamilton any opposed motion carries

CONSIDERATION OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
1:05:10 (0:00:05)


Jenna Stoner
1:05:10 (0:00:05)

consideration of council committee recommendations I'll read these out one at a time

Recommendations from the Committee of the Whole: October 24, 2023 10:00am
1:05:15 (0:00:05)


Jenna Stoner
1:05:15 (0:00:04)

so these are recommendations from Committee of the whole October 24th 2023

West Coast Environmental Law
1:05:20 (0:01:37)

The extract provided does not contain a presentation. It appears to be a part of the voting stage of the District of Squamish council meeting, where council members are voting on motions. Therefore, a summary of a presentation cannot be generated from this extract.

Jenna Stoner
1:05:20 (0:00:53)

the first one is the West Coast environmental law that Council joined the sub Big Oil camp caign class action lawsuit and include $1 per resident in the 2025 budget and that Council requests a copy of the RV Finley legal opinion from West Coast environmental law to be shared with Council would you like me to call these separately councilor Hamilton yes all right so on the first portion of the motion all those opposed councelor Hamilton councelor French and councelor Anderson oppose motion carries on the second P portion of the motion sorry yes Miss Arthurs could you repeat the boote yeah so councelor Hamilton councelor French and councelor Anderson oppose the motion carries on the second portion we

SPEAKER_24
1:06:13 (0:00:07)

have yeah

Jenna Stoner
1:06:21 (0:00:35)

yeah do you want me to double check that Lauren is there counselor green law can you either unmute yourself and or turn on your video just to confirm that you are present for the vote that we just had I'm here thank you very much all right on the second portion of this motion which is that Council request a copy of the legal opinion from West Coast environmental law to be shared with Council all those H sorry any opposed motion carries unanimous the second motion

Brennan Park Recreation Centre Phase 1 Retrofit (Grant 1) Update (Validation Report)
1:06:57 (0:01:41)

The presentation at the District of Squamish council meeting was centered around the Brennan Park Recreation Center Phase One Retrofit. Jenna Stoner, a council member, introduced the topic, stating that the District of Squamish had received a report on October 24th from the facilities planning and construction department. This report was regarding the Brennan Park Recreation Center Phase One Retrofit, which includes green and inclusive community building grants and a validation report. The report also included class CB cost indications and the proposal to advance the project to the next cost update Class A.

Councilor Chris Pettingill then raised a question about the energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) analysis included in the report. He appreciated the detail in the report but expressed concern about the comparison of GHG levels. According to him, the report compared the 2022 GHG levels with the previous levels, presumably from 2020, before and after construction. However, he pointed out that the comparison should be made with the 2010 consumption, population, and efficiency levels.

Pettingill emphasized that the council should be comparing the current situation to where they were in 2010, not adjusting the numbers for today's population. He argued that even though this might be more challenging, it is the target the council has committed to and needs to achieve. He concluded by expressing his support for the project, but requested that future reports take this into consideration to the extent possible.

Jenna Stoner
1:06:57 (0:00:31)

that we have for consideration from Committee of the whole is on Brennan Park recreation center phase one retrofit that the District of Squamish received the report dated October 24th from facilities planning and construction regarding the Brennen Park Rec Center Phase 1 retrofit green and inclusive community building grants and validation report including class CB cost indications and Advance the project to the next cost update Class A any moov by councelor French seconded by councelor Pettingill any opposed question comment from councelor pill go ahead

Chris Pettingill
1:07:28 (0:01:00)

yeah thank you and I'd asked staff for a deeper understanding of the energy the ghg analysis and appreciate that it had good detail as I read it though it looks like we are comparing the 2022 versus previous ghgs assuming 2020 to like current before and after construction levels but at that population whereas what we're me to be doing is measuring the 2010 consumption population efficiency and so on and I don't know that would have a big impact but I just sort of wanted to flag that as much as possible when we're looking at our impacts we need to be comparing to where we were in 2010 at that population not skewing the numbers for today's population because even though it's more challenging that is the target we have committed to and we need to hit and so just making sure that in the future we have that understanding to the degree it's POS possible would be helpful but happy to support

Jenna Stoner
1:08:28 (0:00:10)

this thank you any further comments I'll call the question any opposed motion carries unanimously

Innovation Roadmap and Rural Economic Diversification and Infrastructure Program (REDIP) Application
1:08:38 (0:00:30)


Jenna Stoner
1:08:38 (0:00:29)

Innovation road map on R economic diversification infrastructure program application that Council endorsed the draft District of Squamish Innovation roadmap presented in the October 24th report from ecdev and approve that the district Squamish funding application to the rural ecdev in infrastructure program to implement the District of sish innovation road map moved by councelor Hamilton seconded by councelor Anderson any comments any opposed motion carries unanimously

Proposed Building Bylaw Update: Energy Step Code 3 / Zero Carbon Step Code 4 Option
1:09:08 (0:01:04)


Jenna Stoner
1:09:08 (0:00:30)

proposed building bylaw updates energy step code 30 Z carbon step Code 4 option that Council received the proposed building bylaw update report dated October 24th for information and direct staff to come back with a bylaw Amendment reducing energy step code requirements by one level for any residential part three building if the development proposes to meet zeroc carbon step code level four moved by councelor Hamilton seconded by councelor French any comments councelor pingal go ahead

Chris Pettingill
1:09:39 (0:00:24)

yeah just when the actual bylaw comes back to us I would like to understand the impacts if any if the requirement was for the emissions level four to apply to commercial and residential in order to get the step three on residential so if that can come back with the proposed bylaw I may wish to propose something alternate but happy to support this

Jenna Stoner
1:10:04 (0:00:07)

motion thank you I'll call the question any opposed motion carries unanimously thank you

BYLAWS
1:10:12 (0:00:03)


Jenna Stoner
1:10:12 (0:00:02)

we are now on it item 8 A1 which

District of Squamish Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 2011, Amendment Bylaw (Affordable Housing & Public Service) No. 3018, 2023
1:10:15 (0:26:00)

The council meeting discussed the third reading of the District of Squamish zoning bylaw Number 220 2011 Amendment bylaw affordable housing public service number 3018 2023. The council members discussed the process of adopting the bylaw, with some members expressing concern about potential delays in the process. However, it was clarified that the bylaw could be adopted at the next regular meeting as there were no conditions required or higher level of government approval needed for this bylaw.

The council members also discussed the implications of the bylaw, with many expressing support for the amendment as it aligns with the provincial government's expectations for communities to address the housing shortage. The amendment was seen as a way for the local community to contribute to affordable housing projects by making zoning laws more amenable to such projects. Some council members expressed concerns about the potential for the bylaw to be used broadly across the community, but felt that the controls in the bylaw and the requirements of legal agreements with proponents provided enough checks and balances.

The council members also discussed the importance of signaling to the provincial and federal governments that they are willing to do whatever it takes to address the housing crisis. Some council members expressed concerns about certain areas being far from services and not close to transit, and the potential for the bylaw to add car dependency to affordable units. However, the majority of the council members expressed support for the bylaw, seeing it as an important step in streamlining the process for building 100% affordable housing units in the community. The bylaw was seen as one tool in the toolbox to support those trying to provide below market rental and affordable housing in the community.

Jenna Stoner
1:10:15 (0:00:34)

is a third reading of the District of zoning bylaw Number 220 2011 Amendment bylaw affordable housing public service number 3018 2023 Mr Dy is here he was just sitting in the hot seat through the public hearing I don't think he has an additional presentation at this time but Council if you have any questions that came that will not present any new information since we close the public hearing what is your pleasure councelor pingale

Chris Pettingill
1:10:49 (0:00:17)

so process question sometimes these bylaws can take a while after third reading to get adoption is there that sort of Pro possible process delay like you know we need to go then for provincial approvals or is adoption likely to come quickly after third

SPEAKER_09
1:11:07 (0:00:12)

reading through the chair it could be adopted at the next regular meeting there's no conditions required or no higher level of government approval for this bylaw

SPEAKER_24
1:11:20 (0:00:00)

go ahead

SPEAKER_04
1:11:20 (0:00:13)

Miss Arthur since this is a resoning byw and there are no conditions or highways approvals it could also be adopted Tonight third an adoption on the same night this is the only type of BW where you can do

Jenna Stoner
1:11:34 (0:00:18)

that thank you and to clarify the reason why we might do that is if we just passed third reading and not adoption we still can't talk about it out in the public it risks putting the public Hearing in Jeopardy and so one consideration would be to give it third reading and then adoption but that is Council consideration Council Hamilton please go

Andrew Hamilton
1:11:53 (0:00:12)

ahead I would like to move third reading and Adoption of the then I would like to move third Reading Please

Jenna Stoner
1:12:05 (0:00:06)

seconded by councelor French who would like to speak to it this evening councelor Hamilton go

Andrew Hamilton
1:12:12 (0:00:49)

ahead I want to thank all the members of the public for writing in and coming in tonight we've heard many sensible arguments on both sides of what is really a very difficult challenge for communities around BC and around the world to manage and that is the challenge of creating affordable housing I think that as one of our folks that came in and spoke I said it very well that everybody needs to find the piece that they can contribute and this is one piece that local communities can contribute by making our bylaws and our zoning more amable to affordable housing projects so with that I support this

Jenna Stoner
1:13:01 (0:00:03)

f thank you for your comments we'll go to counselor French

John French
1:13:05 (0:00:35)

thanks chair and I will pile on with the acknowledgement and the thanks for those who participated in the public hearing that Podium can look very scary I recognize that and it really takes something to stand up and share your thoughts share your fears and share your opinion so for those who did thank you so I'm speaking in favor of the bylaw Amendment I believe that it puts us in line with what the provincial government is expecting of communities across the province as we collectively work to address the housing shortage that exists not just in Squamish but across all BC thank you

Jenna Stoner
1:13:41 (0:00:05)

thank you councelor French I have mayor Herford then councelor

Armand Hurford
1:13:46 (0:01:08)

Pettingill yes thank you speaking in support of the motion this approach I think is entirely appropriate and unlike other zoning amendments where the potential is that it can be broadly used across the community with the controls in the bylaw as to who and what product specifically this applies to gives me Comfort that this is the right direction along with our requirements of the legal agreements or the housing yeah housing agreements with the with the proponents so I'm confident that this is a path forward and that staff has done due diligence to make sure that we are only putting these units in safe areas and that we're protected so we actually get the product that we're all collectively striving for so thank you very much

Jenna Stoner
1:14:54 (0:00:03)

thank you mayor Herford councelor Pettingill then councelor Anderson

Chris Pettingill
1:14:58 (0:02:05)

yeah thanks I will support third reading I think I do have some concerns about this but I think it's and one of the speakers spoke to this it's important to signal to the province and the FEDS that we are willing and we want to do whatever it takes to do our part on the housing crisis that people are facing and so I think sending that message to them is important but also understanding that the different levels of government from what I've seen are working collaboratively together to orient these things towards Transit towards sort of holistic Community Solutions but we need to remove those barriers and show that level I think of trust and desire to collaborate to get this to work where my hesitation is that there are certain areas I think FR far from services and not as close to Transit where you know for my mind building this requirement for parking and adding on this car dependency into what are supposed to be affordable units doesn't quite make sense to me I would prefer to and I'm also hesitant about requiring you know the whole purpose of this is to remove barriers but we're saying well if someone has a great downtown location they want a parking variance they can go through the variance process and I would prefer to remove that block and maybe Focus these to areas where we know we don't have to go through the variant and just out of the gate do a lower parking requirement and maybe that'll come back for an amendment but the reason again I am comfortable supporting this is as it is to send that signal to the province and the FEDS that we want to solve this with you and want to plan these well with you and I do feel that's very important and you know I do have comfort in there has to be a housing agreement the parameters of what is entailed in our housing agreements is very clear so these are notk Market driven this is not Market driven building and so I think with that there are enough checks and balances that give me Comfort to support this thank you

Jenna Stoner
1:17:03 (0:00:02)

thank you councelor

Eric Andersen
1:17:06 (0:04:07)

Anderson thank you I will be a reluctant and nervous supporter of this staff recommendation I'd like to make some observations about the community dialogue thus far it's difficult to avoid our whole Community or our absorbed in issues of growth firstly the label nimbyism I think we should be very careful all of us in the community in how we apply this one of the outcomes of it is potentially bad engagement and bad planning outcomes and we I could point to examples it is really not very useful in a good Community dialogue to be using that label against neighborhoods it's going to lead to missteps or mised engagement needs I also noticed that many of the people are adding to the debate are referring to City contexts big city contexts we have a Squamish Valley with unique circumstances and this is just too little appreciated too often and I also am concerned that the provincial government initiatives are oriented around big city con contexts it is this month 20 years exactly since smart growth BC and UBC introduced smart growth principles to Squamish and they included good jobs are close to home also part of our context here complete Community not only at a neighborhood level but at a community and a regional level we're commuting center it's a regional context to that and everyone has a voice was a third principle that speaks to the importance of Engagement we have two posters up in the wall speaking to council priorities connected and livable Community amenities being prepared for the future jobs and economy what I'm pointing to here is that we need to look at this and read the housing needs report of last April in an integrated View and this includes or there's ways to do this and I think at our neighborhood level we need to focus on our neighborhood plans ongoing and making sure they work it's at the neighborhood plan level that we can address parking and understand the parking issues roads we have 1940s and 1960s roads that will not handle the density that is being proposed sometimes and we have experience with this already amenities we don't have an adequate plan for our needs CommunityWide family and neighbors we make investments in our neighborhoods in our homes the neighborhood plans are a place where we can understand those and hear concerns regarding neighborhood values and the Investments That families make and that we all make in our neighborhoods that may be at risk finally I wish to acknowledge the couple of comments from our presenters Mr Kirby Brown on affordability and the importance of looking long-term at affordability and the supply context of that I think that's very important and also for Mr cope we need to be looking at the fundamentals of where building will work and that's always going to be true and we need all Partners to help advise our course of action in this but we and in fact I'm to draw to a conclusion I am nervous about a blanket application and I do acknowledge the points that Mr Toby Ford Kelce has made I think they're valid but I'm less nervous because I don't think that we that it's going to have outcomes that I'm hopeful that they're not going to be outcomes and uncertain consequences but in fact making the fundamentals of building work for affordable housing it's going to involve a lot more discussion and information coming into it so I'm hoping that our planning processes our engagement processes and our neighborhood plans will address this so speaking in favor of the motion thank you chair

Jenna Stoner
1:21:13 (0:02:13)

thank you councelor Anderson I'll make some comments and I'll come back to you councelor pingel I saw your hand I will also be supporting the motion on the floor for third reading for this rezoning bylaw I think that this is an important step for us to be streamlining the process for building 100% affordable housing units in our community I think that it is unlikely that we're going to see a six-story building pop up in the middle of a rs1 single family home subdivision we know that the land values are simply too high to make that work but I think that it's important that we open up the opportunities in order to be able to support those who are trying to provide below Market rental below Market affordable housing in our community in all way shapes and forms that we can this is one tool in our toolbox that we can streamline this process and there are others coming the province has recently announced changes to rs1 zoning to allow up to four