Special Business Meeting - 12 Dec 2023


1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
2: ADOPTION OF AGENDA
3: BYLAWS
3.A: FIRST THREE READINGS
3.A.i: District of Squamish 2024-2028 Five-Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 3025, 2023
3.B: ADOPTION
3.B.i: District of Squamish Land Development Procedures Bylaw No. 2632, 2018, Amendment Bylaw No. 2959, 2023
3.B.ii: District of Squamish Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 2011, Amendment Bylaw (1005 & 1009 Raven Drive) No. 2893, 2022
3.B.iii: District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (39180 Finch Place Non-Market Rental) No. 2996, 2023
3.B.iv: District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (39180 Finch Place Market Rental) No. 2997, 2023
3.B.v: District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (37781 & 37790 Second Avenue Market Rental) No. 3005, 2023
4: STAFF REPORTS
4.A: COMMUNITY PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE
4.A.i: Application to the Agricultural Land Commission for Subdivision of Property Located at 4311 Paradise Valley Road
5: MOTION TO CLOSE
6: TERMINATION
1: Welcome to the Squamish Nation Traditional Territory
0:00:00 (0:05:40)


Armand Hurford
0:04:45 (0:00:54)

thank you hello and welcome to the special business meeting for the District of Squamish for December 12th what's that sorry I'm told I need to stretch for one more minute so we get to the actual 6:00 posted start time that's okay I don't actually have a minute of material prepared so there we are we're at six o'clock so welcome to the welcome to the special business meeting for district Squamish for today December 12th 2023 as always we're gathered to do our work today on the traditional and unseated territory of the skish nation please be advised this Council meeting is being live streamed recorded and will be available to the public to view on the District of skish website following the meeting if you have any concerns please notify the corporate officer present at the meeting

ADOPTION OF AGENDA
0:05:40 (0:00:12)


Armand Hurford
0:05:40 (0:00:11)

could I have someone move adoption of the agenda please move by councelor French second by councelor Anderson all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you so we're on to

District of Squamish 2024-2028 Five-Year Financial Plan Bylaw No. 3025, 2023
0:05:52 (0:58:10)

Megan Lmer, the acting chief administrative officer, and Roland Russell, the senior financial analyst, presented the first three readings of the financial plan bylaw number 3025 2023 to the council. They explained that the financial plan was developed with council input since June and public engagement from October to November. The plan prioritizes risk, life safety, legislation, and the district's strategic plan. It also considers staff capacity to meet service level requirements and strategic plan initiatives. The plan has been challenging due to increased cost pressures, a growing community with diverse needs, housing shortages, ambitious strategic plans, labor market competitiveness, and several large facility construction projects. The plan also includes efforts towards proactive management of assets through a phased reserve funding strategy.

The council members discussed the financial plan, with a particular focus on the Brennan Park Recreation Center project. Councilor Andrew Hamilton raised concerns about the timing and cost of the project, especially in relation to the splash park infrastructure. He suggested a checkpoint for the council before spending $300,000 on a Class A estimate for a building that may not be within the council's priorities for 2025. Councilor Chris Pettingill sought clarity on the amount allocated for design and planning, while Councilor Eric Andersen questioned the budget for public engagement and advertising. Councilor John French questioned the tax revitalization exemptions for Coastal Ford Sales and Matthews West developments. The council agreed to continue with the rest of the budget piece and circle back to the Brennan Park Recreation Center project.

Armand Hurford
0:05:52 (0:00:49)

item three bylaws and we will turn over to staff to run us through the five-year Financial and by lck

SPEAKER_06
0:06:42 (0:05:40)

good evening mayor and Council my name is Megan lmer I'm the acting chief administrative officer tonight and I'm joined here with Roland Russell our senior financial analyst with the district we also have a number of budget managers online tonight to answer questions staff for here to present to council the first three readings of the financial plan bylaw number 3025 2023 so just to give you a bit of an overview of how we got here staff began working with Council on preparing the financial plan back in June of this year public engagement began in October and carried on through no November and we had a public input follow-up meeting two weeks ago to provide council with the priorities that were coming in from the community and tonight we're here for first three readings and then next week we are scheduled if all goes to plan to move to adoption of the financial plan should Council wish the overall financial plan is prioritized by risk life safety legislation and the district strategic plan the financial plan project package also indicates the drivers of why a project is incorporated into the financial plan and considers where staff capacity is needed to meet service level requirements and strategic plan initiatives this methodology is used for projects as well as for the operating budget move to next slide this year has been an incredibly challenging year with increased cost pressures increased borrowing cost costs a growing Community with diverse needs housing shortages an ambitious strategic plan labor market competitiveness and several large facility construction projects underway inflation supply chain continue to be a challenge which is felt all across all departments and within all projects Transit expansion continues to be a community priority and requires annual investment the district has in invested significantly in aging facilities with the upgrades to Brennan Park Recreation Center two new Fire Halls and a public works facility which has been funded through land Reserve grants and borrowing The increased costs associated with borrowing are spread across several years in the 2024 2028 financial plan the 2023 Financial fiscal service level changes Focus primarily on labor contracts for the fire department the RCMP Union contract results of the transit strike and an organizational restructure during the Spring Amendment the costs associated with this have annualization impacts on the 2024 20 2028 financial plan the district continues to be challenged with staff resources as the community continues to expand and change service expectations additional strategic initiatives are added and New Capital assets that require operating and maintenance finally the 2024 2028 financial plan has incorporated efforts towards the ProActive Management of our assets through a phase Reserve funding strategy to meet the goals of the council endorsed 2022 Asset Management report this ensures that reserves are being replenished in accordance with maintenance and replacement schedules Long into the future the 2024 2028 financial plan has taken a thoughtful and measured approach to addressing these cost pressures and we are incredibly proud of the efforts that staff have made to create this financial plan despite the mounting economic and market challenges some highlights include limiting 2024 to just service level maintenance which is just the additional resources required to maintain current service level expectations this is after several years of minimal investment due to the focus on labor contract negotiations pandemic and post-pandemic limitations as the capital plan requirements continue to grow a major methodology shift in process Improvement for the district is to attribute the staff that are focused on Capital implementations to be funded by the capital projects themselves this Improvement ensures the accurate cost of the capital project is captured and accounted for and allows the district the flexibility to scale resources to support Capital implementation including consultant support thank you District staff have made tremendous efforts to absorb the inflation costs where possible through throughout the operating project budgets as well initiatives were rep prioritized and delayed where possible to keep budgets as consistent as possible year toe staff maximize funding opportunities leveraging external funding sources and utilizing Provisions to smooth costs year-over-year the district improved cash flow management processes in 2022 to include temporary borrowing which allows the district to delay large long-term debt issuance by managing cash flow for consum construction of capital projects through small short-term temporary borrowing finally the district introduced the concept of tax stabilization in 2022 a budget process Improvement that provides council with the opportunity to smooth in costs by utilizing the previous year's unused tax Surplus I'll now turn the presentation over to Mr Russell to summarize the financial

SPEAKER_01
0:12:22 (0:04:31)

plan good afternoon mayor members of council members of the public who may have joined us just want to highlight a couple of the things that are directly related to this financial plan so first off it conforms to the provinal reporting requirements which means that it balances and you know I that may seem intuitive but sometimes you have to jump through a number of Hoops to get that to happen so we're pretty happy with how that has worked out and so we'd like to highlight a few things with respect to the revenues the expenses and items that were used to balance so the tax revenue requirements for 2024 are projected to be $42.25 million the utility revenues in 2020 for our projected to be approximately $20 million and our total Capital spending will be about $69 million in total on the expense side the general fund is we are anticipating expenses of approximately $65 million utility expenses are around 199 million and to get all this to balance we should comment that we are making repayment of debt of 4.5 million and transfers to reserves including the asset management components of just over $25 million in 2024 as we move forward so those are some of the numerical highlights of the financial plan and these values all tie to specific line items within the actual bylaw itself further to that we would like to highlight the financial plan tax impacts and as you can see although this size is a little small the larger picture of that is in your package or printed material that goes with this in 2024 we're projecting a tax increase on the average residential of 9% and that would work out to approximately $216 on the current residential tax bill and it stays roughly in that range as we move forward in the next couple of years so it slightly over nine slightly under nine in that 20 30 to $250 range going up slightly year by year those values are the result of the impacts of some long-term planning and a recovery that the district has undertaken from years where they were not investing in facility replacement and so as a result of the real estate and Facilities master plan and a few other Master plans we have significant utility invest sorry not utility I should say facility Investments and a lot of the push that you see here in the next few years is a direct result of that and related to the financing of those new facilities so just like to point that out and at this point rather than open it for discussion we would like to pause and ask general manager Stoner if sorry Stone my apologies if he would like to add a few remarks with respect to some questions that were directed from Council to the administration at the last meeting with respect to brenon park concessions so I'll pause

SPEAKER_08
0:16:53 (0:00:03)

here yeah can you hear me okay

Armand Hurford
0:16:57 (0:00:00)

perfect than

SPEAKER_08
0:16:58 (0:01:58)

you Mr Russell you had it right the first time Bill Stoner general manager of community services so last week there was a question about the concession the project that we call is called in the budget the Brennen Park concession and Parks Adent we created a memo we submitted as part of your budget package and I'm joined today I Believe by Cal Braggs the director of facility and planning construction we can take some questions on that before we do that I just want to quickly touch BAS on an element of confusion that I may have contributed to just to clear it up this project is called a concession in the budget description when you dig down into it what the needs that this project are filling are two we're looking to fill the need for an accessible change room and washroom and a perks office and both of these needs have been identified in master plans as short-term requirements within five years so that is what this project is looking to address it is called a concession largely because of for lack of a better term a bad habit we call the building that this will replace the concession building because I guess sometime in the past it had a working concession in it unfortunately we chose to call the new building the concession building even though it is not being designed for a concession it being designed for parks office and an accessible change room washroom so some poor choice of a title Min for that and I think in general in community services we' recognized that we could do a better job of titling some of our budget requests and certainly providing better information the council we'll look to do that with the next budget process so hopefully that clears up the naming issue but if there's other questions I'm happy to take them and Mr Cal brag is here as well I

Armand Hurford
0:18:57 (0:00:22)

believe okay on me will focus just what we have everyone on this particular topic we'll focus a discussion on this item and then we'll back out to look at the at the overall if everyone's okay with that so on this item do we have any questions for staff yeah go ahead councelor

Andrew Hamilton
0:19:19 (0:00:29)

Hamil thanks very much thanks very much for the memo that was really valuable insight into what the thinking on the project is I just want to confirm in previous meetings there was mention of the possibility of this being needed for Splash Park infrastructure is that not required does this have anything to do with the splash

SPEAKER_05
0:19:49 (0:00:03)

park take that or did you made to take that one

SPEAKER_08
0:19:52 (0:00:32)

I can start that through the chair the main reason we're bringing up this building as I said is we need that the parks office and the accessible change rooms if in the course of planning it's identified that there is an opportunity to put a mechanical room in here that will help address the splash park that it's cost effective to do this and that's operationally effective to do this we would we would certainly look at that it is not the reason this building is being built and then Cal's on the line if you can address that

SPEAKER_05
0:20:25 (0:00:41)

further through the chair I mean there's not much to their bill what we're trying to do is combine buildings where we can and combine operations and combine just to you for cost feasibilities if we can fit the mechanical room in here from the splash park and it fits within the budget then we'll it's ideal to do that this building is not for the actual mechanical of the splash park this is just a side add-on and we'll know over the next two months as we go through the splash pad design if it will be included in this building or not but yeah the building first and foremost is a parks office and also a public washroom which is fully

Armand Hurford
0:21:07 (0:00:02)

accessible go ahead councelor

Andrew Hamilton
0:21:09 (0:00:07)

Hamilton thanks I'll followup what's the time scale of the splash park projected time scale

SPEAKER_05
0:21:17 (0:00:17)

through the chair we're looking at completing construction towards the end of 20124 we're planning with the proponent at the moment we don't have a complete date of that we'll know about six weeks here when the completion date is going to be

Andrew Hamilton
0:21:34 (0:00:21)

scheduled so the I'm confused by the timing if the splash park is supposed to be finished this year in 2024 but we are budgeting for planning of the concession building in 2024 I'm confused by the possibility of using it as a mechanical

SPEAKER_05
0:21:56 (0:00:30)

room we can still through the chair we can still use as a mechanical even so the buildings would be finished at a different time you are correct there and I think that's where the confusion comes in where the utilities come in and then funnel back out there's utilities that have to go to the concession sorry there's utilities that have to go to the parks office SL public washrooms and there's also utilities that need to go to the splash pad if we can combine them which decreases costs of both projects then we will do that if it doesn't decrease the cost of both projects then they will be

Andrew Hamilton
0:22:26 (0:00:49)

separate okay so I imagine you have some temporary solution for the mechanical supply to the splash park for 2024 construction and then maybe put it into the concession building okay that that's it's fine I'm confused by the timeline but that's okay another question was one of the in the renom the real estate and Facilities master plan it identifi the existing Brandon Park concession as an unsafe space for workers and I just wanted to make sure the I understood correctly that they are in a temporary trailer right now that does meet health and safety standards for our Parks

SPEAKER_05
0:23:16 (0:00:16)

workers through the chair yes we do have a modular trailer that's on site I think it's about 50 m 70 M away that Park staff are utilizing as their office instead of using that building correct

Armand Hurford
0:23:32 (0:00:09)

yep on this on this topic yeah I'll look around if there any I'll go to councelor penil and we'll come back go ahead councelor Penning then Anderson

Chris Pettingill
0:23:41 (0:00:39)

yeah thanks and I just want to understand the numbers and the memo a bit because it talks about 300,000 for planning in 2024 and then it talks about construction 2025 at around 2.5 million 10% or $250,000 for planning is that the same design Planning number and we're or are we talking about a total of $550,000 for design and planning and is that so I guess I'm looking for Clarity on what is the amount we're putting towards design and planning and in total and what is sort of a normal ratio for that expense on buildings if we if there is

SPEAKER_05
0:24:21 (0:00:11)

one through the chair yeah obviously varies between each buildings But A good rule of thumm is usually about 10% of the total project budget goes towards design and planning it's a very rough

Chris Pettingill
0:24:33 (0:00:14)

number so that 250 then is included in the 300 the 300 is that 250 plus a bit of extra or because it again talks about design and planning in 2024 and

SPEAKER_05
0:24:47 (0:00:19)

2025 through the chair there's going to be a bit of a crossover on timing here so we allocate give or take $250 to $300,000 just for the design proportion and that would be for 202 24 and then we flow into construction the year after in 2025 there's a slight cross over there like there's not a definitive time when it starts and stops it's a rough time

Chris Pettingill
0:25:07 (0:00:08)

line okay so and so we're talking about around 300 250 to 300 and not 550 for design and planning right now is our estimate

SPEAKER_05
0:25:16 (0:00:03)

very good check

Armand Hurford
0:25:19 (0:00:04)

correct thank you Council Anderson

Eric Andersen
0:25:23 (0:00:52)

y i note that of the $250,000 allocated to design and planning for this project there is $20,000 specifically for engagement public relations and advertising in the general fund that we're looking at for this year in the financial plan we do have $36,000 allocated to capital projects Communications support I'm wondering what is envisioned with respect to this particular project for public engagement I'm trying to understand this budget item for this particular building project what would we be doing for $20,000 for public engagement and advertising it seems high amount I'm just curious if you may be able to elaborate on what might be envisioned for spending that $20,000

SPEAKER_05
0:26:16 (0:00:31)

TR the chair it is High and it's an allocation we' just pared that number it doesn't mean we're going to spend $20,000 for this and I'll pull it back to the verbiage here if we do go for a concession stand here and we do decide that we're going to combine a building Allin one we do want to get some Community input and Community User Group feedback as well which will be then required there's a bit of work and resources and that's where the cost is allocated we've done this just as an allocation because it is a public facing building and we do want Community input in these

Eric Andersen
0:26:47 (0:00:03)

instances thank you that satisfyed

Armand Hurford
0:26:50 (0:00:08)

me thank you anyone else before I go back to councelor Hamilton counc Hamilton

Andrew Hamilton
0:26:59 (0:00:50)

thanks very much and my next question is about the estimated the current estimated cost in the real estate facilities master plan in 2018 the estimated cost of the building was 2.8 million the current estimated cost of the building is still 2.8 million is has there been a change in the scope of the building or has this number just been carried from 2018 to now my concern is that we've carried this number from 2018 till now and the real cost of this building will be more like 7 million which if we take the cost of build cost of inflation building inflation over these seven years five years that's what we're going to get

SPEAKER_05
0:27:50 (0:00:57)

to yeah through the shair the real estate facility's master plan stated was 2,000 square ft as well and again you noted it was back in 200 8 and what we're finding is as we drill into the actual product and in particular this product is with public works and their operations we don't know if it's going to be 2,000t or not so again we just allocated this number based on a rough size we think we can build this for it wasn't just a literally a cut from the 2018 to pull it in the other variable here is we are redoing the Public Works office as well and this the facility sorry this is a satellite facility for Public Works we haven't got to the detail and finalized that scope of work cuz we're just not there in process yet for this project of exactly what po Works needs through this so we'll get to there over the next 2 and a half to 3 months but at this stage again it's a placeholder because we're just not at that stage of we don't know if it's 2,000 sare ft we don't know the size of the accessible bathrooms yet we're just not there yet and it's in as far as the process

Andrew Hamilton
0:28:47 (0:00:25)

goes yeah go ahead yeah thanks very much and my next question is about the next touch point for Council in the in the memo it said that the you'd be coming back to council at the end of 2024 with a cost a estimate is that still your plan next planned touch point for

SPEAKER_05
0:29:13 (0:00:19)

Council through the chair that is the next plan touch Point we can bring that sooner to council we still have the class DCB to go through in the process so we can come back to council as we get to a class C or a Class D to then get to the point of you know what is this product and what we think the cost of this product is going to

Andrew Hamilton
0:29:32 (0:01:06)

be yeah thanks one of my concerns here is that we're obviously coming into a time of a lot of a lot of budgetary pressure this is a core this is a building has been identified as a core building this is not a critical building I recognize that it's required I recognize that we want to get this building built but I want to be sure that we're making clear plans forward in times of extraordinarily High budget increases right so I'd like to my concern is that we go and spend $300,000 to get a Class A estimate on a building that costs way more than we're willing to spend so I'd like to see if there's a way we can get an estimate to council a touch point to Council sooner than the class a estimate with a clear scope of the project perhaps a Class D or a Class C estimate do you have a suggestion how we might be able to achieve that

SPEAKER_05
0:30:39 (0:00:39)

through the chair yes we can put this in the process and come back to council at a Class D or Class C and we can come back in quarter two for next year and that will get us to a stage my estimate is about $ 15 to $18,000 that we need to spend to get to that stage we need some schematic drawings and we need some quantity surve in there we need a Geotech to check some items there but that's that instead of spending the 300 and have to retract if we decide that the product's not feasible then we'll be spending between say5 and $20,000 we can come back to council at least that will put us on a direction to say yes or

Andrew Hamilton
0:31:18 (0:00:27)

no great that sounds like a sensible plan to me that makes me much more comfortable than charging forward with spending $300,000 to get a get a Class A estimate on a building that Council may decide is not within our priorities for 2025 so it do you would you require a motion to that effect or would that roll over into sort of normal course of

Armand Hurford
0:31:45 (0:00:43)

business we'd always say a motion would be helpful but I think that at this point we move on with the rest of the budget piece and then we can maybe deal with that separately and we don't necessarily need that motion tonight either so we can we can discuss that you know we would like to have a check a checkpoint I understand where you're where you're going and I've worked to do that but if we can continue with the bud the rest of the budget piece then we can Circle back to that okay any other questions on this particular piece before we go back okay all right Mr Russell did you have a did you have an additional slide or you just wanted to provide that offramp for us on this one

SPEAKER_01
0:32:28 (0:00:40)

topic I can do both I do have one additional slide that basically outlines what the sorry what our resolution is for this evening which I see my friendly assistant here in the background is created for you and put on screen this is the resolution that is in the report and that is what we are we are asking Council to do and I'll stop here and turn it back to you chair for additional discussion

Armand Hurford
0:33:09 (0:00:19)

okay thank you this is an important slide but I wasn't sure what level of detail you are going to be providing your next slide so Council thank you for the focus discussion on the one on the one topic but now more broadly with the budget do we questions I'm going to start with Council French and then I'll go councelor

John French
0:33:29 (0:00:42)

store thanks mayor at the very end of the staff report there is a revitalization exemption table with two items in it I went back to the same report from last year and noted that there were no such exemptions in last year's report Coastal Ford Sales and Matthews West developments are noted in this table and these two you know don't have any memory of seeing any information in such a table in previous budget exercises so I was wondering what is behind the revitalization exemptions for these two companies

SPEAKER_01
0:34:11 (0:02:07)

through the mayor I think the first and best way to address that question is to say certainly for Matthews West that was an oversight last here there is a tax exemption a revitalization tax exemption has been granted to them for properties at the ocean front and it extends through 2024 I believe this is last year okay for Coastal Ford Sales Coastal Ford Sales had an exemption on the building and we believe that was t to the building inspection and unfortunately our detailed files and building inspection are off site we weren't able to get them out of storage and review them in time for this meeting today what I would say is the two values that have been identified are identified on BC assessments exemption listing that we received from BC assessment so they those properties and a portion of those properties are exempt from taxation based on the assess on the assessment that BC assessment provides us so we are exempting them and I believe that was overlooked last year because the coastal for one for example I think because being a building being more related to buildings than the land that say let's say again I think was just missed in our pickup like when we went in and ran the information for billing exemptions or sorry tax exemptions we missed that so I think I think the error was an error of omission in 2023 rather than in

John French
0:36:18 (0:00:03)

2024 okay don't have any other questions thank

Armand Hurford
0:36:22 (0:00:16)

you thank you I'll go to you next counselor s can you just take down the resolution so that folks can see the folks online can see can see us all I don't know how simple there we go thank you okay councelor

Jenna Stoner
0:36:38 (0:00:13)

Stoner thank you through the chair just to follow up on councelor French's question do we know what the sunset Clause is for the tax re revitalization agreement that would apply to the Coastal Ford Sales

SPEAKER_01
0:36:52 (0:00:36)

Center that's the information we were attempting to Garner from the detailed agreement the agreement's offsite we haven't had an opportunity to review that so it is our understanding there was a previous agreement which I believe ran out in 2020 so if that was extended again the original agreement was issued in 2015 my understanding is that under any circumstance they can run a maximum of 10 years so I believe that it also will be up in 2024 but we we've not been able to confirm

Jenna Stoner
0:37:28 (0:00:18)

that okay is it possible for staff to bring that information back at a later date I don't think it's a game Cher for me this evening but it'd be helpful to know what the context is there because I think all those agreements predat any of us who are currently sitting around this

SPEAKER_01
0:37:47 (0:00:05)

horseshoe yes it would yes we would be able to bring return with that

Jenna Stoner
0:37:53 (0:01:05)

information I did have one other question around the financial plan summary for the general fund so that's page nine of our package and just looking at the five-year financial plan Horizon with the revenues I think I know the answer to this but I was just seeking some clarity the total revenues actually the total revenue requirement actually decreases by 2028 from 76 million in 2024 to 74 million in 2028 and I appreciate that our fifth year in the 5-year financial plan is not as robust as our first year in the 5-e financial plan but I was just curious given that the revenues are fairly stable but the general taxation rate increases by almost $20 million and I'm just wondering if staff can explain that Gap is it just because we don't know which grants and things like that will be coming in four or five years time and so to balance the books we allocate it to General taxation

SPEAKER_01
0:38:58 (0:02:54)

through the mayor I think there's a number of factors at play here we're looking at increases known increases so for example projections for inflationary items like staff costs we have some other items that we've also projected so for example financing costs associated with debt issued for various buildings we have a reasonable idea based on the on the timing within the within the capital plan when we expect to have to start repaying those and so those can fluctuate and they are movable to some degree obviously if Council chooses not to proceede with the building that will have some impact some of the grants we are showing we have received some of the future grants obviously were not aware of and so we're not up to projecting something that we don't feel that there's a reasonable basis and I believe that those types of things would put additional pressure on the tax levy but when I look at the overall year-over-year increases there's some years that where jumps fairly significantly but as an example in the last year of this 5year plan the increase in the in the taxes is approximately the same as it has been this year from 23 to 24 so that's not a significant increase and in fact from a percentage standpoint will be lower than it is this year I think and I recognize that you're looking at the overall revenues sorry not just the other piece that we're seeing is we have some items that are named as revenues okay such as sale proceeds to sale of assets which are onetime things which we anticipate will occur and in fact would need to occur early in the financial plan to allow us to replenish our Reserves to maintain our ability to meet the capital plan requirements so there are some things that are that are kind of a oneoff that occur and once that takes place that's great it replenishes your reserves and then over time you're going to use that money up but I think that hopefully is points you in the right direction for an

Armand Hurford
0:41:53 (0:00:16)

explanation thank you Council other questions not seeing any we have been through this quite a few councel FES yeah go ahead

John French
0:42:09 (0:00:03)

I'll move the staff recommendation if you're ready for it

Armand Hurford
0:42:13 (0:00:06)

are you seconding that councelor counselor Stoner seconds thank you and would you like to speak to

John French
0:42:19 (0:02:24)

it yes I would like to speak to it so this is the fifth budget process for me as counselor after watching the process from the gallery dating back to the early 1990s this financial plan I find is unique in a bunch of ways it's a post-pandemic budget of course created in a high inflation environment following Decades of singled digigit tax increase budgets that gave insufficient attention to our aging infrastructure and we're now faced with a long list of Municipal Billings that are at end of life or in desperate need of upgrades to Stave off end of life and that comes on top of a quickly growing population due to how attractive this place is as a place to live not a city not a resort but just nicely in between the two this financial plan presents a number of non-discretionary cost increases that we're committed to there are only a few items that Council has decision-making power over in this budget and I spent more than a few hours going through all the elements in the budget with an eye for what could be taken out and in my opinion everything in this plan is Justified as uncomfortable as I am with the significant tax increase that I'm basically endorsing I'd be more uncomfortable trying to remove things to bring down that increase there's just nothing more to take out of this budget I don't see any item that I feel can reasonably be pushed out to next year or subsequent years this budget pushes forward Necessities like additional policing more firefighting resources water system improvements sewer upgrades Solid Waste improvements and Recreation Center Renovations and very exciting for many families looks like we're going to have a splash park at some point next year and I heard loud and clear that a splash park is something that families are very much wanting in our community and because it rains here a fair amount I also want to point out that investing in our library another familyfriendly oriented facility that also happens to be of great value to seniors and those who are less interested in our outdoor recreation amenities I support this motion and I support the plan that it

Armand Hurford
0:44:44 (0:00:06)

represents thank you councelor French other comments councelor

Jenna Stoner
0:44:50 (0:02:57)

Stoner thank you through the chair I will also be supporting the motion on the floor for first three readings of the 2024 to 2028 financial plan following on from my Council call or Council frenches comments this is a tricky budget it's a tricky budget year with a net tax increase of 9% for our community knowing the number of pressures that people are feeling in their day-to-day lives with inflationary pressures cost of living and all the other things we know that the district is not immune to those inflationary pressures the pressures the cost of living and ensuring that we continue to be a great District that can provide great service to a community that has increasing demands of the services that they expect from their local governments this budget really does try to manage that pressure while recognizing the importance of investing in our people and the people who deliver those Services while also trying to plan for the future and the growth of our community everything from a really needed investment in our asset management plan so 2.4% of that tax increase is looking at annual level contributions that are needed just to ensure the replacement of existing infrastructure this is something that we haven't done before starting to build our reserves in a way that will actually set people up for success in the future to make sure that there's money set aside to replace our aging infrastructure and maintain it in a good way the asset management cost unfortunately does not include funding for growth or Capital additions or the cost of accounting for climate change impacts on our infrastructure and our services and so that's why the rest of the budget is also really important we often hear a lot of criticism that we are not investing sufficiently in our infrastructure everything from Wastewater to water to our facilities and this budget shows that is the opposite there's 70.6 million dollar of capital investment in 2024 alone 53.1 of that is General fund for things like active Transportation Parks and Recreation Run and Park all things that we hear about time and time again from our community as critical components 17.5 million of that is for utilities upgrading our wastewater treatment plant doing important work around our water system making sure that there's enough water and that the pipes are up to speed so that we can actually be delivering clean crystal clear water to our communities for the year to come and the five years looking forward so I am grateful for all the work that staff and this Council have done and the feedback that we've received from our community in order to make the difficult decisions that have gotten us here tonight for first three readings of this budget and I think that it does balance the many pressures that we're feeling as a growing community in a way that is fiscally responsible and forward-looking so thank you very

Armand Hurford
0:47:48 (0:00:05)

much thank you councelor stoner other comments counc penel

Chris Pettingill
0:47:53 (0:02:22)

yeah thanks and thanks to staff and everyone the community and the rest of council for working through this it's always a long process where we get to talk about our community priorities just to I think I agree with what my colleagues have already said I do want to highlight that we have as a council in my first term and last year have had a budget increases that seem to be typically far below most other communities in DC most of our neighbors at least and this year is higher but more in line with what other communities are saying and so while it's a shift for us it's actually not out of Norm for what people are seeing across the province in terms of inflation and so on and that's maybe small Comfort if you're looking to save every penny but I hope and I am a firm believer that you know taxes often get a bad rap but it's actually how we pull our resources as a community to come together as a community to provide the services that we all need especially those who are struggling more and so I think for me our willingness to contribute to our community is a good measure of the strength of our community and how much we care for each other I am you know a little bit more hesitant looking forward you know some years where we're doing catchup on the infrastructure investment shortfalls the asset management plan I think is something I'm really quite proud of us doing and that is a significant portion of this budget and it's necessary but it does mean sort of bringing our community into the budget increase Norm of the province which does still feel a little bit uncomfortable and so you know can we sustain that for the next five years this level I'm a little less certain there but I think this year with the items we have in the budget and the things that are just so many demands this is where we are and what we need to be doing and so really look forward to strategic planning and having another look and continuing the discussion with everyone in this room and the community over the next few years as well thank

Armand Hurford
0:50:15 (0:00:04)

you thank you councelor penal councelor Anderson

Eric Andersen
0:50:19 (0:04:10)

thank you I Echo the comments of each of my previous colleague speakers I'll just add the general statement that I continue to be impressed with the Machinery if you like the process the ever higher standards that we staff really are applying towards the annual financial plan initiatives another General comment is regarding public input last week we had a session where we that was what we were to be doing on the agenda each year I reflect on this we do receive public input and substantial this time around and the Communications Department does a very good job I think in assembling it making clear and coherent what we did here and how and where but I I'm I reflect on the fact that we don't actually engage with that input during our meeting when we do con are expected to consider it and I think that we it's important that we be seen to have considered public input and there were some patterns in what we've heard we've heard comment and I agree with councelor Stoner regarding the robust nature of our planning these days for infrastructure but what is infrastructure for the public it actually includes amenities and I'm not sure that we can say the same things and there's different reasons behind it for our planning regarding Community amenities and that is something that comes up with the public in there and sometimes they do label it infrastructure a couple of the comments are these are basically work plan topics and they're not really of urgency tonight because we'll be able to consider them next time they're in the budget for spending in 2025 and Beyond however there's $30,000 allocated to Heritage strategy statements of significance in fact most communities do not engage with professional experts to write these documents and they rely on local volunteers and when we come to consider that first and we will have opportunity to I would suggest that ex that yeah expectation of pursuing it that way may need to be Revisited essentially a consultant is going to be interviewing local volunteers that's where the expertise resides that's that $30,000 over three years starting in 2026 the green economy impact sector impact assessment is scheduled to start in 20 27 while the outdoor recreation in 2026 and again we'll have opportunity to revisit this but I would suggest that the green economy should be prioritized and I have some reasons for this the green economy includes the housing or the material building supply material supply chain that should be considered a priority as housing is a priority for us and we have a number of firms engaged in delivering housing for us and can do even more it is a high-wage job sector it is a sector in which the Squamish nation is profoundly engaged and we do have a need to build a picture of this sector and its Affiliated clusters this is work awaiting and building that picture also will help us with our employment land needs analysis we have a number of firms in this area that are indicating they're having difficulties with land so we'll revisit that again in future but it is a prioritizing whether we should do one or the other in 2026 2027 I will otherwise be interested in the opportunity for Council to apply its strategic plan lends to some of these items I guess finally looking forward with great interest to a report from staff on the employment lands tool the modeling tool and its scope and what how it will upgrade from the last and the Marine impact study scope I do hope that Council will be able to engage with staff on the scope for that very important study upcoming next year thank

Armand Hurford
0:54:30 (0:00:06)

you thank you councelor Anderson councelor

Andrew Hamilton
0:54:37 (0:00:29)

Hamilton yeah I'll certainly be supporting the motion on the floor I want to thank staff for the immense amount of work that it takes to get this kind of budget together it's a lot of work to read it obviously but every single word we're reading has been written by a member of staff and every single line that we pour over has been has already been poured over by our diligence staff so thank you very much for the work you do to put together this very thorough budget

Armand Hurford
0:55:07 (0:00:06)

thanks thank you councelor

Lauren Greenlaw
0:55:13 (0:00:31)

Greenlaw yeah I feel as though everything I would like to say is already been said so thank you for all your hard work and as councelor Hamilton just pointed out as much effort as we put into reading this staff puts in a lot more so it's no small feat to keep a municipality running especially in a financially healthy way so I appreciate all the efforts you've made to help that happen

Armand Hurford
0:55:45 (0:05:57)

thanks thank you speaking in support of the motion I'd like to start by as others have by thanking our staff we have some here today in the in Chambers we have others joining online but the budget process involves just a broad cross-section of our of our organization that really leads to where we are today so just thank you for all the all the work throughout the process and to work with Council to arrive here at a at a supportable document and I'm quite excited about many pieces here I think others have spoken to the asset management plan and I think this is really important I'm very proud of this of this group to really be taking a Long View and certainly a much longer view than just oh I don't know a four-year election cycle this is this is the asset management plan and including its really the rubber hitting the road of making Financial contributions towards asset replacement in the future is a reaction to where we are today we've been working our way through facilities deficit we know that we have facilities that are Beyond capacity Beyond end of life and for all wide range of probably very good reasons past councils haven't set us up well to be dealing with that and we're working very hard to deal with that as well as taking on the responsibility of ensuring that our future community and its leaders are in for far better position when it's time to address their future asset needs very excited about that I wanted to touch on the transit service for we've been here before but we've committed to expanding mention of our Transit service and I believe quite aggressively and we need to see that matching funding come from the province to actually see it come to fruition and I look forward to that to that happening and I think we've communicated around this table that that's an expectation this is a goal for our community and the community has communicated that by riding the transit system and having phenomenal numbers of ridership and demanding better service and we're here to do that and I hope the funds the folks at the at the Province can help us along on that on that journey and not noted here is our continued advocacy towards Regional Transit we have a lot of Transit needs in our in our community and I look forward to seeing hopefully all of them Advance I also want to touch on the large aspect of sort of planning a community that is for everybody and a couple things that jump out here for me are the age friendly planning initiative that's coming and it's key to ensure that we're that as the community evolves over time we're evolving in a way that really takes into consideration the all the needs of our of our community this is also reflected in the all ages and Roots project and active transportation and that thought process of really thinking about the community as a whole all the subsets of it I know appears in staff's thinking as they go about their work in other areas but it shows up specifically in these pieces the facilities are a driver here we know that fire hall number two is underway Public Works is happening Brennan Park this in 2024 is going to start seeing some changes and it's surely just the just the beginning the work there to increase accessibility decrease our carbon footprint is also about setting us up for the future as we look at future year expansions of ice rink and pool which are appearing in our F in the financial plan in late in later years so it's an exciting time for Brennan Park I think we could say long overdue as far as Community expectations go and I know that the district everybody has been working towards this being in this position for a long time it's taken a lot of work to get here and I'm quite excited about that I told myself I'd stop speaking after five minutes and I'm going to do that so there's so much there's so much here and it took us so much work to get here and I look forward to seeing the projects and initiatives encapsuled in this in this budget coming to life in 2024 and Beyond so with that I'll call the question all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you so much okay Council we're on to we have some adoptions to do and we do have folks available if we have questions on them but generally as is come yeah go ahead

Andrew Hamilton
1:01:42 (0:00:29)

would this be a reasonable opportunity yes y so I'd like to put a motion on the floor that staff come back to council I don't know if I want to put a timeline on it can't see sta so I won't put a timeline on it with a Class D estimate for the Brennan Park concession before progressing to class C or a

Armand Hurford
1:02:12 (0:00:08)

estimates I have a question but I also saw miss slader's hand so I'm going to start

SPEAKER_06
1:02:20 (0:00:14)

there thank you through the mayor just as a point of clarification a Class D estimate would already come back to council as part of our normal operational processes so that may save Council some time in terms of putting a motion on the

Armand Hurford
1:02:34 (0:00:06)

floor yeah go ahead and then I I've

Andrew Hamilton
1:02:41 (0:00:25)

got yeah so my confusion was that the staff memo said that the next touch point for Council was the class a estimate and that was confirmed by Cal so that's my concern about maybe our understanding of our normal procedure or if it's our normal procedure I'm comfortable with it but it didn't seem to come through in the

SPEAKER_06
1:03:06 (0:00:05)

memo staff can bring back the class D estimate as part of our operational

Armand Hurford
1:03:12 (0:00:49)

process thank you I was going to make the suggestion that we see a regular updates on our overall progress on the facility's work and perhaps just asking for it specifically to be cited there would be give us at least ensure that we get I believe those are quarterly is that quarterly yeah quarterly frequency updates on overall and it's the opportunity to explore that so it would definitely come as part of that as sort of in due course but we could also be explicit with that and I think that might be a reasonable place to put that if you'd like if you feel if you still feel we need to make a motion I I'll be looking for it in that report myself so no okay so MO has been okay retracted okay thank you okay

ADOPTION
1:04:02 (0:00:15)


Armand Hurford
1:04:02 (0:00:15)

we're on to adoption so again we don't have presentations with adoption as for our normal operating procedure but we do have staff available if there are questions from Council so

District of Squamish Land Development Procedures Bylaw No. 2632, 2018, Amendment Bylaw No. 2959, 2023
1:04:17 (0:01:02)


Armand Hurford
1:04:17 (0:00:19)

Council stor are you moving the first one which is the Land Development procedures bylaw great moved by coun Stoner I'll second it any comments on this no call question all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you counc penel

Chris Pettingill
1:04:36 (0:00:20)

yeah I did have a question if about ensuring we receive an annual report on the variances just so we can understand on an ongoing basis what sort of things that we've delegated are being varied and so on I'm not sure if that requires a motion and it doesn't have to be tonight but I'm looking for some guidance on how to ensure we get

Armand Hurford
1:04:57 (0:00:21)

that okay what we can do there is I can take I can take that away with staff and just make sure that we're aligned on reporting expectations and then if we need to provide more direction we can do that as a as a council okay the

District of Squamish Zoning Bylaw No. 2200, 2011, Amendment Bylaw (1005 & 1009 Raven Drive) No. 2893, 2022
1:05:19 (0:01:53)

Councillor Andrew Hamilton raised a concern about the location of garbage bins in a property under discussion. He noted that the bins were very close to the neighboring house and that there had been no change to their location in the recent drawings. He questioned when the decision was made to keep the bins in their current location and whether this decision was final.

In response, an unidentified speaker (Speaker_09) explained that the staff had previously discussed with the applicant about potentially changing the location of the bins during the development permit process. This was due to the need for more clarification from BC Hydro about construction options under the hydro. Mayor Armand Hurford added that the exact location of the bins would be determined in a future step and reminded the council that new information could be presented after the public hearing before adoption. The discussion ended with a motion moved by Councillor Jenna Stoner and seconded by Councillor John French. The motion was carried with no opposition.

Armand Hurford
1:05:19 (0:00:15)

so next we have the zoning bylaw Amendment bylaw for one5 and one9 Raven Drive y go

Andrew Hamilton
1:05:34 (0:00:42)

ahead I have a question on this and I recognize that perhaps the best place for this question would have been when we saw it recently but it missed my memory at that point in time during the initial discussion on that property there was a lot of convers there was a lot of concern about the location of the actually the garbage brid bins being very close to the neighbors they're within a few meters of the neighbor's house and I noticed on the drawings that there were no there was no change to the location of the garbage bins at what point in time was that decision is that decision solidified and it was decided that they would stay

SPEAKER_09
1:06:16 (0:00:22)

there through the I am just concerned about potentially presenting the information I think I could answer this question with just repeating what was presented previously staff had spoken to the applicant about working with them to look at a future location at the development permit process because they needed more clarification with BC Hydro as to what options they have for constructing things under the hydro

Armand Hurford
1:06:39 (0:00:16)

rway so the exact location will be done at on your future step and we're also after public hearing before adoption new information space just to keep that in mind

Andrew Hamilton
1:06:55 (0:00:05)

thank you for that reminder thanks well that's

Armand Hurford
1:07:00 (0:00:11)

it okay moved by councelor Stoner second by councelor French all in favor any opposed motion carries thank you

District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (39180 Finch Place Non-Market Rental) No. 2996, 2023
1:07:12 (0:00:20)


Armand Hurford
1:07:12 (0:00:19)

and next we're on to the district schom housing agreement bylaw for 39180 Finch place the non-market rentals I'll move that move second by councelor French all in favor any opposed motion carries thank you next

District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (39180 Finch Place Market Rental) No. 2997, 2023
1:07:32 (0:00:17)


Armand Hurford
1:07:32 (0:00:17)

we have District scalish housing agreement bylaw for 39180 Finch place this is the market rental of that development moved by councelor French second by councelor Hamilton all in favor any opposed motion carries thank you next

District of Squamish Housing Agreement Bylaw (37781 & 37790 Second Avenue Market Rental) No. 3005, 2023
1:07:49 (0:00:21)


Armand Hurford
1:07:49 (0:00:21)

we have District s housing agreement bylaw for 377810 7790 second AV and that's for the market rentals I'll move that second by councelor Hamilton all in favor motion carries unanimously thank you

Application to the Agricultural Land Commission for Subdivision of Property Located at 4311 Paradise Valley Road
1:08:10 (0:22:13)

Brian Daly, a planner with Community Development, presented a subdivision application for a property located at 4311 Paradise Valley Road, which is within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). The property was previously subdivided in 2016 under Section 514 of the Local Government Act to provide residence for a relative. The owners have now prepared a revised subdivision plan for the ALR to consider, as their previous application was refused. The new application proposes a 3. 8-hectare parcel that does not include any area within the BC Hydro right-of-way. The intention is to subdivide one of the existing homes to create a title for another family member. Daly recommended forwarding the application to the ALR for their consideration.

During the discussion, council members raised questions about the zoning of the property, the potential increase in the property's value after subdivision, and the potential for increased residential capacity on the lots. Councillor Hamilton expressed concern about increasing the development capacity of the lots in the future. Councillor Stoner asked about the rationale for recommending the application be forwarded to the ALR, given that subdivision of agricultural lots typically goes against the OCP policy. Councillor Pettingill questioned whether the aggregate value of the subdivided lots would be higher than the single lot. After the discussion, the council voted on the motion to forward the application to the ALR. The motion carried, with Councillors Greenlaw and Pettingill opposing.

Armand Hurford
1:08:10 (0:00:16)

oh there you go so now we're on to staff reports so this is section 4A I'll pass it over to staff to introduce themselves in the topic

SPEAKER_09
1:08:26 (0:04:25)

thank you mayor Herford good evening mayor and Council my name is Brian Daly planner with Community Development and tonight I'm here to present a subdivision application for a property in the agricultural land Reserve for Council to consider forwarding the application to the agricultural land commission for decision the subject property is located at 4311 Paradise Valley Road and is within the ALR the property was subdivided in 2016 under Section 514 of the Local Government Act of a subdivision to provide residence for relative and approved by the ALC at the July 12th 2022 Committee of the whole meeting Council resolved to forward a previous subdivision application for the subject property to the alc for decision on February 7th 2023 the alc refused the subdivision application the land owners have prepared a revised subdivision plan and have applied to have this new application considered by the alc the parcel is a 4.52 hectare property zoned rural residential 2 neighboring neighbor properties to the north south and east are also zoned rl2 and also in the ALR the agricultural land commission Act is the primary piece of legislation governing agricultural land in BC the LC's mandate is to preserve agricultural land it has the authority to determine the appropriateness of future subdivision and non-farm uses proposed in the ALR to exclude land and to advise on inclusion provincial legislation requires that the owners of land within the ALR seek permission from the alc prior to subdivision ALC permission is required prior to receiving Municipal approvals the first step in the subdivision process for ALR land is for the local government to consider by Council resolution whether they will forward the application by landowner to subdivide onto the alc for consideration if the local government does not forward the application to the alc then the application will be closed and the proposal will not proceed by forwarding the application to the alc council is not approving or endorsing the proposed subdivision but supporting its consideration by the alc the Al's permission may be accompanied by specific conditions if the application for the ALR subdivision is forwarded to the alc by Council and then not approved by the alc the subdivision process would not proceed through further Municipal processes section 514 of the Local Government Act allows subdivision of a parcel of land that would not meet the minimum parcel size requirements in the relevant Zone provided that it is for the purpose of providing residents for relative as a condition of subdivision approval the owner must enter into a restrictive covenant that restricts further subdivision of a period of 5 years as previously noted the sub the property was subdivided in 2016 to provide residence for one of the property owner's children as the legislated 5-year prohibition on further subdivision has passed the owners have submitted another subdivision application to the alc to provide residence for the owner's other child and family the property is currently developed with two single unit dwellings no development is proposed at the subdivision application the intention is to subdivide off one of the existing homes to create title for a family member given that no development is proposed with the subdivision application it would not trigger the requirement for a development permit for the protection of environment or protection from flood Hazard the previous subdivision application contemplated a 1 hectare parcel with a property line extending West into the BC Hydro RightWay running through the property the alc one some of the LC's rational for refusing the previous application noted that the most capable land on the property for agriculture is located under the hydro rway and subdividing this area into smaller Parcels would increase the likelihood that the resulting Lots would be used solely for residential purpose in the future the decision also notes that the least productive area for farming is area fronting Paradise Valley Road and that this area can be used for residential or Farm related infrastructure without impacting the high agricultural capability on the property the new application is proposing a 38 hectare parcel and does not include any of the area within the hydro rway should the subdivision application be approved by the alc the land owners would be able to submit a subdivision application to the district as it appears that the revised subdivision plan May address a number of the reasons the previous proposal was rejected by the alc staff are recommending referring the application to the alc for their consideration so staff's recommendation is to forward the application onto the alc for their consideration that concludes my presentation and I'm happy to take

Armand Hurford
1:12:52 (0:00:09)

questions thank you Council questions counc

Andrew Hamilton
1:13:02 (0:00:39)

Hamilton thanks very much for the presentation so the original lot before subdivision into the lot on the North I think it's 4481 those that was an rl2 Zone and then it was split into two tol to two rl2 zones is that correct through the mirror that's correct and so would this in principle then split this smaller lot into two rl2 zones

SPEAKER_09
1:13:42 (0:00:08)

through the mirror that's correct there's no changing to the zoning proposed it's just a subdivision to create an additional

Andrew Hamilton
1:13:50 (0:00:12)

parcel does this increase the legal build capacity on that property the combined three properties

SPEAKER_09
1:14:02 (0:00:40)

now through the mayor no it doesn't and all of this is a referral to the alc for their consideration if it were to be successful then they would have to submit a subdivision application to the district for consideration and one of the requirements would likely be a con a flood hazard assessment and likely a covenant restricting them to the existing capability on the lot so that they aren't technically increasing the development potential also it would require a covenant stating that it can't be sold for at least or further subdivided for 5 years and must be inhabited by a relative of the owners which it currently

Andrew Hamilton
1:14:43 (0:00:04)

is presumably that inhabitants also has a sunset

SPEAKER_09
1:14:48 (0:00:07)

right yes it does have a sunset but I don't know off the top of my head I believe it's likely 5 years

Andrew Hamilton
1:14:56 (0:00:33)

and so I noticed the lot to the north is 1.26 hectares and the minimum lot size for an rl2 property is four hectares so we're now going to have three rl2 properties all of which being below the minimum property size for an rl2 property is that a normal course of

SPEAKER_09
1:15:30 (0:00:31)

procedure through the mayor it is uncommon it has been the section 514 of the Local Government Act contemplates this specific form of subdivision and allows it to be less than the parcel size prescribed in the zone and it was successfully completed on this parcel previously so it is not common but it is something that has been in the Local Government Act for some time and contemplated as an allowable course of action for someone to subdivide their property to provide residence for a

Andrew Hamilton
1:16:01 (0:00:04)

relative thanks very

Armand Hurford
1:16:06 (0:00:01)

much counc

Jenna Stoner
1:16:08 (0:00:54)

Stoner yeah thank you through the chair I'm just wondering if staff can speak a little bit further to their rationale to recommend that this get forwarded to the alc given that subdivision of agricultural Lots is typically or sorry yeah agricultural lots are typically against the ocp policy and a significant portion of the Al's decision speaks to the risk that smaller Lots would increase the likelihood that the resulting Lots would be used solely for residential purposes and the intrusion of residential parsers into the agricultural land Reserve May create more conflicts between residential and agricultural uses in the area which typically aligns with our ocp policy so I'm just curious how staff Balan that with the allowance in the Local Government Act for Section 514 and where we came out with the recommendation that we have in front of us

SPEAKER_09
1:17:02 (0:00:42)

through the mayor so staff considered the reasons for approval or refusal by the alc and the applicants desire to have this revised subdivision plan considered staff felt that a number of the issues that were noted were addressed by this revised subdivision plan and unfortunately for the proponent they did request a reconsideration by the alc the alc refused that because they said that presenting this revised subdivision plan is new information and required a new application so they are going through this process again to try and get this reconsidered by the alc and staff felt that the alc would be the appropriate body to determine if this subdivision layout is appropriate or

Armand Hurford
1:17:45 (0:00:03)

not okay any other oh counc

Chris Pettingill
1:17:48 (0:00:15)

pel is it unreasonable to think that the two lots the aggregate value of the subdivided two lots would be higher than the single lot

SPEAKER_09
1:18:03 (0:00:14)

typically through the mayor I'm not sure like the aggregate Financial value or developable I'm not sure I can make a comment on

Armand Hurford
1:18:17 (0:00:02)

that okay councelor

Andrew Hamilton
1:18:20 (0:00:34)

Hamilton so I'm I understand the 5year sunset on having these properties perhaps owned and inhabited by family but in seven years time or 10 years time what I see here are three rl2 lots Each of which have the right to put an accessory dwelling on them thereby doubling the residential capacity of those three lots do I understand that

SPEAKER_09
1:18:55 (0:00:21)

correctly through the mayor because this is in the ALR there are restrictions on the use of the land and I believe a future project is looking at egg zoning throughout the district to align with what is allowed in the ALR just because the zoning May permit an accessory dwelling unit doesn't necessarily mean it would be allowed under the ALR

Andrew Hamilton
1:19:16 (0:00:19)

rigs but in the building that we're talking about is an accessory dwelling building the building that's being the building that the that this that's currently sitting on this lot I understand do I understand correctly that is an accessory residential

SPEAKER_09
1:19:36 (0:00:33)

dwelling through the mayor this property is unique in that it has two I'm not sure that this is technically an accessory residential an accessory dwelling unit this was built before those regulations even existed so they were able to obtain approval to build two or three homes on this very large lot and then the first one was subdivided off through this provision and they're looking to subdivide this existing building off under this provision as well but this preceded our accessory dwelling unit regulations that came into effect in I believe

Andrew Hamilton
1:20:09 (0:00:33)

2017 so okay so my concern here is that we're actually increasing the build capacity on these Lots I have no objection to somebody subdividing the Lots to allocate that to different family members because that the spirit of that is not increasing the develop development capacity of the Lots but in 10 years I'm concerned that it will is there anything we can do to ensure that the development capacity will not be increased on these

SPEAKER_09
1:20:43 (0:00:42)

Lots through the mayor at this point in the process no this is just a decision on whether council is comfortable forwarding this application for the alcc to make their decision or not that is what this specific application is being considered in front of council right now through the subdivision process if it was if it was successful at the alc while that does not go to council it is in a high flood Hazard area and the approving officer can require reports and Covenants to you know deal with Hazard M mitigation and that could be something that would be addressed through the subdivision process if it even gets to that

Andrew Hamilton
1:21:25 (0:00:20)

point would it be reasonable to consider zoning these to rl1 instead of rl2 which to my reading of the zoning bylaw appeal appears more suitable for these smaller

SPEAKER_09
1:21:46 (0:00:27)

Lots through the mayor that's not really something that staff considered as part of this again this is a decision on whether Council feels it's appropriate to forward this subdivision application that's in front of them to the alc for consideration if that's not something that council is comfortable with they certainly have the option to not refer it but ultimately if it is referred the alc would still have to make a decision on this subdivision applica this new subdivision application that would be referred

Armand Hurford
1:22:14 (0:00:03)

to

Chris Pettingill
1:22:17 (0:00:16)

them just a process question I assume if we if a majority of us weren't comfortable with this the correct process would be for someone to move and second it and then to vote it down as opposed to not move

Armand Hurford
1:22:34 (0:00:15)

it I think I think that some that it should be moved and seconded and debated and voted that's our path to getting to the to the answer whatever that is councelor Stoner

Jenna Stoner
1:22:49 (0:00:10)

you could also make a motion to not refer it

Armand Hurford
1:23:00 (0:00:19)

okay I don't see any other hands for questions so we are at the motion we do have a recommendation before us is anyone ready to move the staff recommendation move by councelor French is there a second or second by councelor Anderson would I speak to it y go ahead

John French
1:23:19 (0:00:32)

thanks mayor Herford and I'm going this route because as staff have pointed out this is fairly simple at this point it's simply a referral to the agricultural land commission who will apply their expertise into