All right. I'd like to call the regular meeting of the township council for Monday, 20- May 25th to order. Of course, I'd like to begin by acknowledging the traditional territories of the Coast Salish peoples and, in particular, our valued relationships with the Katzie, quant- Katzie, Kwantlen, Matsqui, and Semiahmoo First Nations. With that, can I get a motion to adopt the agenda? Moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Bailey. Call the question on A1. (chair creaks) (chair clicks) Could you just vote for Councilor Reker, please? Miss, Miss Bauer, you can mark Councilor Reker absent, please. All right. (breathes heavily) It's just a... Yeah. Technical glitch. Okay. That's a matter of... Yeah. (paper rustles) All right. That carries unanimously. Can I get a motion to adopt the regular meeting minutes of May 11th? Moved by Councilor Ferguson, seconded by Councilor Wrenn. Seeing no other questions or discussions. Can you... Great. Let's call the question on that. (chair creaks) (chair clicks) Great. That carries unanimously. Councilor Reker, absent. First delegation today, uh, Michael Davies, please come forward. Thanks. Is it gonna be up on the screen? No, go ahead. No? Well, I was looking for the presentation, just to- Okay. Seems to have a few issues here with the system today, so maybe bear with us. There we go. There we go. Yeah. Great, so go ahead. Yeah. Thanks again- So Mayor Woodward, Council, not here with pitchforks or torches or anything. This is a... just to thank you. And you probably don't get a lot of these, but each and every one of you, this is a big step for the township, a new park. Um, some of you, um, Councilors Martins and Bailey with our boots on a couple of years ago, walking in deep mud, looking at what could have been not a great idea at the time, um, staff, and we didn't plan it this way, but, so Mr. Groves and his team will present after, uh, this presentation about the great ideas for this park. And maybe next slide, please.So I'm here on behalf of the Little Campbell Watershed Society, and we've been looking at the watershed for about 30 years. And Old Horn Pit in this area, and if you look at this one map, you see where the, uh, the Little Campbell River takes a turn at the very top there. It's a critical part of the, of the river and it's where it gets a lot of its inflow. And it's where the gradients start to change as it heads southward, and it's where we've had trouble with dry reaches in the summer. So what we've done, there was an envir- industrial legacy in the area. Uh, we've looked at that, and I'm gonna just talk about a few things that have happened over the last year or so, including a bird survey, a bio blitz, some things with water, and just f- call out quickly the fire hole that's going on on the same property. For those of us who live in South Langley, in the rural area, thank you so much. Um, just to pull over our neighbors, we're all saving about $1,500 a year on our insurance, but more importantly, the response time. If any of us have a barn fire or similar, it's, it's gonna be great. So thank you, thank you, thank you. Okay. Next slide please. So the Horn Pit Mine, as many of the mines in the Lower Mainland, was a gravel aggregate site. It was used to help develop the Brookswood area and, and otherwise, but it largely a local-served, uh, pit. Um, over the 30 years, uh, post the, uh, sort of 1990s, random fill was placed in the site, which is very typical of, of these former sites. A wetland in spite of itself developed on the site, and quite a vigorous and, and a very, um, productive wetland. There was an updated reclamation plan that was started in the mid to late 2000s, and then staff started really taking it seriously about five to eight years ago. Um, but what was key is there was commitment made by this council in '23, '24 to leave a wetlands area and large buffer along the Little Campbell River for a nature park. And that's what we'd like to thank you and show you some of that progress today. Also, we're really appreciative of the township made further to that commitment buying a peak- piece of property right along that same stretch of the river. Next slide please. So just on two slides, and I, I could not have told you that there was this many bird species on the planet, let alone on this site, but we saw over 40 species on a survey just over a month ago. Um, and apparently this was not a high bird day. The- you get much more different times a year than this particular day. So this is a pretty average day for that site, and we still had over 40 species. Next slide please. Um, and it just... The, the list goes on and on. There's a lot of these animals that, that really need these sort of areas and green spaces that are, that are distributed towards... You know, throughout an area like we have in, in South Langley and, and, you know, by keeping this land the way it is, it's gonna really, really allow these people... these, uh, critters and, and the people that enjoy them to continue to do so for, for, for decades. Again, next slide. We did a bio blitz about a year ago, probably do another one this year. Other than the, the things you would expect like coyotes and otters and things, three different species of bats, little brown bat, California bat, hoary bat. Uh, there was more than 85 bird species during that bio blitz, six different types of bees, which are all very important obviously as the pollinators to keep our, our, our agribusiness, uh, in business, butterfly species, and tons of, of plant species, including, uh, very encouragingly, a lot of native plants. Next please. On the water side of things, one of the critical things that this nature park will do is prevent hardscaping, a very important part. For those of you who may remember some of the delegations over time, hardscaping is the one real challenge to a watershed, particularly with the rivers, because that water then just runs off in the winter. We're talking right now, the reach... lots of chatter on the internet right now, and I don't own a turf farm, somebody thinks I do, um, but, you know, we get a lot of water, but we, we throw it away in the winter by letting it run off to the ocean versus storing it. Well, we can have reservoirs to store it for drinking water, but we can also use our groundwater to store. And this will allow that water to store and it will help replenish what's going on in, in the, uh, in the, in the, in the, um, the aquifer and in the river. And also, we're very appreciative of the fact that the stritch- switch to metro water in the region will help recharge that groundwater system too, because right now there's some very heavy users of groundwater that will switch over to metro water and that will help that rebound as well. So well done there again. And we're also appreciative that we're working on a update to the water, to storm water, integrated storm water plan and, um, we're working with staff and, uh, the consultant there in giving some, uh, some in- advisory capacity and, and we appreciate that ability to have input. So final slide, I believe. Thank you. That's really what we are here to do. You know, we're, we're just a volunteer group. Um, you know, whatever stripe... We know you guys have an election going all out, but all of you, thank you all of you for your support on this. Um, there's a lot of critters that can't speak for themselves. We're trying to speak for them. We believe a, uh, a rural part of Langley is important. We know there's urban growth, but we think a strong Langley and the character of Langley... We don't wanna see what's happening in Surrey. We look what's happening in Campbell Heights and South Campbell Heights, it's pretty distressing. So we think we can be the township, we can be the part of Vancouver that the region that can demonstrate you can do it and balance it and we're appreciative that you seem to support that as well and thank you so much. And that's all we had. Oh, s- A couple questions from council, I think. Uh, Council- Uh, it used to be the other way around. (laughs)Uh, Councilor Jo. Yeah, I wanna, uh, turn this round on you there, uh, Mike. And, and thanks for coming. Uh, good seeing you again. Uh, thank you and Christine and, uh, others that, uh, stomped through the mud with us, and, uh, told us if we were going on the right path or we weren't going on the right path. And, uh, those, uh, tea, those sit-downs for tea and, and that kinda stuff, uh, sure as hell helped me. Okay? And then there we've got that Scott guy sitting up in the corner over there who, uh, came up with some creative ways to build mountains and, uh, and, uh, save us money on the dirt, and has made this into a, something that is ... That's Mount Groves, by the way. (laughs). So that's ... One, one of the, uh, one of the proudest things that I'm gonna be able to say I was part of was, uh, uh, forming this into a, a, a considerable nature park, and, uh, s- and turning it around from when we first started talking with all the residential and all that other kind of stuff, especially south of the road. So thank you, Mike and Christine and Scott. Well, we know you get a lot of pressure. We know this land and commercially, it's probably worth $50 or $60 million. Yeah. S- sorry. I might've heard that number once in a while from the mayor. Um, but it, uh, it's incalculable what the value is to our region sometimes. So sometimes, you know, we can't put money on everything, right? So I thank you. And, and having that as a, as a cutoff and cutting off the road at the fire, that's huge. Massive. Sure. Okay. Councilor Martins? Thank you. Hi. Good afternoon, Dr. Davies. Hey. How are you? Good. Good. Um, I have one question first. Sure. And I just wanted to make a couple comments. Out of curiosity, how many volunteers do you have in your society? Well, our... On our board, we've got, uh, 12 or 14. But, um, before we get blitzes and stuff, it really... You know, we get people out. I mean, our, our best day out was on a wetland day. We had 200, uh, unique people. Wow. So I think there's a sort of silent majority of people that all support this. Mm-hmm. And it's just rallying those. What we're trying to do is get more youth out and working with scouts and other groups, and that's, that's the next big push. We had a, we had a lantern night in the... I don't know if you recall that last fall. Mm-hmm. And mostly, mostly younger families came out, and it was rewarding. There was like 150 kids or something, so. Yeah. Yeah, that's a great start. Trying to get them to understand nature, right? Yeah, yeah. Exactly. And, um, my, my late mother, um, loved birds and listening to the different sounds and identifying them, and that was her hobby. Magic, isn't it? And I didn't unfortunately inherit that trait, although I appreciate it. But, um, just- We'll do something. ... reflecting... (laughs) You'll, you'll, you'll... The genes will be there. I'll get there somewhere. (laughs). Um, but just reflecting on, uh, when we were walking around with you and, um, Dr. Bishop, and, um, and her identifying all the different noises that she was hearing coming from the trees. And, um, it, it just, it really hit home, um, how precious this is. And, um, if you're, you're not aware to it and in tune to it, it's just so easy to pave over paradise. So, um, I thank you for taking the time and, uh, allowing us to just really understand, um, what, what this could look like. And I'm excited as well to see it here today. Great. Thanks. Thank you. Councilor Koontz? Yeah, thank you for coming and for all the work that you and your organization have done. Um, I, I live in Brookswood, so, um, I do appreciate that we have these types of parks, um, in the corner of the world that I live in. Um, years ago, uh, Christine actually, um, introduced me to the, uh, a bunch of different creeks and rivers in the Campbell River Watershed, and we went on a tour. And, uh, it's, it's something I think every member of council should do before, you know, the start of every term so that they understand what's going on in our, uh, in our, um, different, uh, watersheds. So thank you again for, for the work that your, uh, organization that's done. Councilor Bailey's just hit me up for wanting to go back out there, so anybody- Awesome. Invite me. ... everybody should come along. It's, it's really rewarding. Thank you. Councilor Ferguson. Oh, yes, thank you, uh, Dr. Davies. Have you know, it's interesting, um, uh, my new mantra is I never, I never thought. It's, that's a lot of things. Schools coming in here, parks, uh, other things, and now you've come today. And, um, it goes so far back that my wife used to go down to that area with her dad (laughs) and her two sisters on a regular basis. That was many, 30 plus years ago. And, uh, we never thought what would happen in that park, that we'd all sorts of discussions and... I've been down there, but not with you and former staff members. I live in the... I could walk to the area. I drove by today, both on 200th Street and 196th, both sides. Uh, I've been... a few potholes over the years. I've seen a lot of, uh, we've done a lot of impro- even improvements on 196th, come when that... and shared by Surrey, of course. And, um, what you've done with your group, I don't have to compliment you. And who would have thought we have a fire hall there and some other uses? We all work together, blend together. It's different than some of our neighbors have done, but, um, I certainly, uh, compliment you, what you've done with this group and, um, looking forward to moving forward to the next step. And, uh, thank you for coming. Yeah, I mean, I don't wanna pry, but I, I spent my life as a mining executive. And so part of it is trying to re-... It was a mine. And what we can do with land after we've exploited it, let's... So that's part of the goal too. Oh, one last question. Sure. I know that there's a question. And, you know, I've worked with LEPS and things like that as well over the years. Invasive species, do you... You probably got an awful lot of that happening. We do, and particularly the blackberry. Mm-hmm. Um, Scott loves blackberry, sorry. Sorry. But, uh- Yeah, I believe you. ... just... (laughs) (laughs) Uh, we, we have had polls, and we will... And that's part of the volunteer thing. We will, we will be organizing once we get this off the ground and we get some trails, which hopefully we're gonna hear about in a few minutes. We'd like to organize some community polls and stuff and get in there and really hit that hard, because yes, invasive species are an issue and they're not, they're not friendly for our local animals either, so.Very good. I know what the problem... Thank you. Councilor Woodbridge. Yeah, thank you for, uh, coming today, and I appreciate all your work on this project. Uh, also being a Brookswood guy, I'm really appreciative that this is going to be in that area. Um, I had a question just... I couldn't see it, and maybe I missed it when you were talking, but what is the size of the, of the park? Do you know what size it would be? So, it's going to be about 88... Go ahead. 80-ish. 80... About 80 acres? It looks like 66. Doesn't have it. That's okay. Sorry, I rely upon your great staff to have those numbers. Okay. Well, I'm sure we can get that from them as well. It's in that range. If you take the whole property, it's about a golf course, which is 80 to 100 acres. Right. Okay. So it's in that range. Yeah, so I have walked it, so I remember it, but I'm trying to think of how big it would be. Yeah. Um, so when this is all sort of up and running, what, in best case scenario in your mind, how, how would the public access it? I mean, be trails- Yeah. ... um, educational programs. What kind of things do you envision would happen on a park like this? Exactly those things. Probably a viewing platform of some form that's accessible, like, to people that can't walk easily and whatnot. Probably a little bit more challenging viewpoints for the people who want to go mountain, little hills and whatnot. Areas that people can't get to, so that, you know, there can be nests and whatnot that aren't, that aren't, uh, attached. Very similar, if you look at some of the, um, the wet, the nat- natural parks that we already have in the region, not necessarily all in Lively, but in other regions. Go down to Burns Bog, uh, check out some of that stuff there. Right, right. Out, out, out in Delta, um, the Rifle Sanctuary and whatnot, where there's good walking pla- places, places you can't walk in. Similar, same Derby Reach, they've got a little bit of both. Okay. So it's a mixture. Yeah, that's great. Absolutely. Awesome. Well, thank you so much for your efforts. We appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, thanks again. Remember the conversations from years ago now, multiple years ago. Yeah. And I appreciate you very much, uh, constantly and, uh, what's been done with an area that was slated for housing, you know, previously has been great with the view parks and the slopes and, and using that for some transfer of soil with other projects. It's been... I think it's been great. And there'll still be some housing. And seeing the concept on the agenda here today, uh, you have a lot to be proud of, and everybody else that advocated for it to go in this direction. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you again. And it's not me, it's the group and, and, and David Riley, I want to do a shout out. 35 years he's been pushing for this, and he... Good guy. Thank you. Thank you. All right, that's good with that. We'll go to item E1, Fern Ridge Nature Park concept update. I'll move the recommendation. Seconded by Councilor Pratt. Is there any questions or discussion on E1? Which one are we on? E1. Councilor Bailey, go ahead. Yeah, looking at the map, I, I wonder is it possible to pull up the map of the, uh, park? And I want to draw attention to the section that comes down onto 24th Avenue. There is a piece that, uh, we added. I remember going to Mayor Woodward and saying we should buy this 5.5 acre, uh, piece, and it's not included, I see, in the boundary of the park. And it is, uh, in my opinion, uh, should be included in there because we bought it to protect the creek that goes through there, the Little Campbell. And, um, currently it's not on the, on the map as a park. Uh, can any... Can I get staff to, um, talk to me about this and, uh, say why, please? So if, if you're looking at it, uh, look at the bottom, then you see the, uh, the section with the houses, and then you see a section with just the trees that comes out onto 24th Avenue. That part we purchased, uh, what, three years ago, I believe it was, uh, with the purpose of it being included in the park. Um, Councilor Bailey, through, uh, through the mayor, uh, the property was purchased by the township. It's in our township inventory. Uh, however, not... I don't believe specifically designated as park yet by council. So that'd probably be a step that we, we, uh, should take, if that's what we want to pursue. I'll be, I'll be moving an amendment to, uh, deal with that, then, when it's, uh, the appropriate time. All right, we'll come back to that. Uh, Councilor Martins? Oh, yeah, thank you. Um, I'm really... As I mentioned earlier, I'm very excited about this project, and I'm seeing this map. Um, I do have a question, and thinking of the greater area, including the fire hall, um, is there any suitable location for a cell tower? Because I know that the cell coverage is really terrible in that area, and I know the residents would be very happy for some improved cell coverage. If I can, sorry, through the chair to staff. Through your worship, through Councilor Martins. With respect to the telecommunication towers, um, staff have been looking at the potential option within the general area in the vicinity of it. Um, if you, um, with respect to the neighborhood planning process, the, uh, lands directly north and some of the lands cells as well are mixed employment, so there may be potential opportunities during the development of these, um, development of some of these, uh, properties as well. But staff are actively looking at potential locations, uh, in this vicinity for, uh, telecommunication towers, as several companies have inquired as well. Thank you. So, um, I'm glad to hear that staff are, uh, making a priority for that. Um, that will be an, an added feature that I know a lot of people would appreciate, and... But not one that takes away from the wildlife. So, good luck with that. (laughs)Counselor Whitmarsh. Yes, thank you. Uh, just a question to staff, uh, through Your Worship. Um, looking on the map, um, maybe you could just pull up the map again, if we have it there. Um, before... I'm just wondering on there if the, um, I think it's the north part, and I think, Mr. Cooner, you mentioned, um, some other, uh, options for things. And I'm wondering is th- is the, is the part in the north there, just north of the 70- 27th Avenue, um, is there a plan for that right now, or is that, um, still to be decided? Through Your Worship, to Counselor Whitmarsh specifically, there, there, there is a Brookswood Neighborhood Plan that, uh, has land use designations, uh, that, uh, designate the properties north of 27th Avenue, um, i- i- but are you referring to specifically this site? Well, I guess, I'm just wo- like, I'm wondering, I ha- I, uh, um, haven't been part of the discussions around this particular plan, so I was wondering about, uh, I know the, uh, earlier before this plan came, there was some talk about some housing. Is that meant to be housing in that area or what, what is the intention of the area above 27th Avenue? I don't have that in front of me, so... The plan in front of me. That's north of, uh, 27th. Through Your Worship to Counselor Whitmarsh, uh, I, I believe there was a land use designation of special housing that designated, uh, one of the corners north of 27th Avenue, on 200th Street, um, from the Brookswood Fire Hall. Um, that land use designation w- was, was done through the Brookswood Neighborhood Planning Process, and, uh, I believe we, uh, our staff are still reviewing it. There's no specific direction on that item at this moment. Okay. Um, the item... The other question I had, um, was around, um, in the report it talks about building parking space so that people can come and u- enjoy the park and so on. Um, do we have any idea at this point what, how many spots, uh, we would be developing in that parking space? Through Your Worship to Counselor Whitmarsh, the parking space, um, i- is labeled on the Attachment A. Um, it's conceptually s- shown. Obviously, we would look at, when we go through, uh, further detailed design and, uh, construction aspect of it, we would know the exact size. But, uh, it would include washrooms. We don't anticipate it to be a extremely large parking lot. Um, we would say less than 20 stalls or so, um, would be anticipated in, in the parking, uh, th- uh, s- directly s- south of the Brookswood Fire Hall. Yeah, okay. I mean, I don't know what the right size should be, I just... I guess my only concern would be that we wouldn't have e- enough parking. A lot of people will wanna enjoy the park, they'll wanna come and, and spend time there. And, uh, and if once the park's, the parking lot's full, they'll end up probably parking on 200th Street, which is probably not the safest place to park. And so, um, I guess just wanting to make sure that we have a, the right size of parking lot for the many people that are gonna come and enjoy, obviously, a very large park of close to 80 acres. So, um, just wanna make sure that's right sized. Thank you. Counselor Ferguson? Yeah. Oh, yeah, first thing first. I know that, uh, the... I, I live in the Brookswood Fern Ridge area. In fact, I could walk to this park, as I said before. The idea of cell towers, it's a challenge because, uh, reception is poor. But I don't know about putting a cell tower in the middle of a nature park is the actual answer. They need accs- ah, access roads, they need, uh, p- uh, personnel to get the service and to monitor those towers. And, um, there's probably not an awful lot left. I know that I think they approached the fire hall, fire folk, and I don't think they wanted it to interrupt, interrupt with their services, uh, as well. Okay, so back to, um, the map that, uh, we're looking at, Attachment A, the road is off 196th, uh, potential trail connection to the, to the street, that's currently, uh, an access road for trucks and equipment to go in right now, if I may? Uh, through Your Worship to you, Counselor Ferguson, that is not currently open, uh, at this time. Oh, yeah, I know it's not open, but they have a gate there, and they have, uh, an access road for, for trucks. I drive by this all the time. I don't ex- maybe, I don't expect you to maybe know that. But, uh, they've been, uh, when they were doing all, a lot of the fill and moving in with a lot of trucks for several years, they were using that access point. Uh, through Your Worship to Counselor Ferguson, there, the access point being used currently is, is a bit further north than that, as, uh, you can see a bit of that, uh, uh, d- dirt road that's been established there. But that's a bit further north than the, uh, 196th, uh, potential trail connection. Oh, okay. Thank you very much, I appreciate that. All right, uh, Ms. Brown, if you could leave that up. Is there a way for you to rotate that 90 degrees, potentially, that map? Okay. So if you can turn your head 90 degrees, rather than the document, you'll see a potential trail connection to 196th Street. Uh, I'm gonna make an amendment that the potential trail connection to 196th be confirmed, and included as part of the proposed Fern Ridge Nature Park concept, seconded by Counselor Ferguson. Second. So that would change it from potential to, um, council will endorse that to be proceeding. Is there any other questions or discussion on that amendment? Seeing none. Call the question on the...That carries unanimously. Uh, Councilor Bailey, I did look up the address there for you. That was 19757 24th Avenue, acquired in 2023. It's two and a half acres. Um, so go ahead if you wish to make an amendment there. Yes, I'd like to move an amendment to include that within the park boundaries. Seconded by Councilor Rent. Is there any other questions or discussion on that? Councilor Bailey, go ahead. I- I- I think it's very important that that gets included, because the reason that we went and purchased it is that is where Little Campbell crosses underneath the road and begins its journey towards the, uh, the, uh, pond structure right there. Uh, that was originally when they were... Had that listed for development. And I think to make sure that we protect that creek as hard as we can, uh, that this should be included in the park boundaries and, uh, made sure that, that it, uh, serves a purpose of, uh, keeping that pond at the proper levels. All right. Ms. Bauer, I just wanted to note, make sure, need to stop and confirm that I have the address correct. But I have 19757 24th Avenue as the parcel, the subject of the amendment. All right. Uh, Councilor Whitmarsh. Yeah, just, um, I just wanted to, with the map, just have, uh, clarify exactly which piece of property it is. Um, as I'm looking at the map, it's hard to tell which one that is for me. And so I didn't know if it was just directly east of the, uh, looks like there's storage containers or something. Is that the one directly north of that? Yeah. So the one with the storage containers is not owned by the township. So we own that s- square, is that right? Is it... Or it goes all the way up? No, this one. That one right there. It goes to 24th. Okay, and it goes right to 24th. Okay, thank you. That's helpful. Councilor Ferguson. Yeah, just clarification. I think that's also a fish-bearing stream as well, that area. Thank you. All right, thanks. Any other questions or discussions? Call the question on that amendments. That carries unanimously. Any other discussion on E1 as amended? Seeing none. Call the question on E1 as amended. That carries unanimously. Item E2, Nathan Creek Wetlands Park update. Moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Rent. Is there any discussion on E2? Councilor Kunst. Yeah, I was just wondering if this is similar to the, um, the Salmon Habitat Project. I think it was the Conwest Group that... Is it similar in scope to that? Noticed that it's five acres. And that the one I'm talking about is 96 and 227. Yeah, 96 and 227. (laughs) Thanks. Uh, to your, to Your Worship, to Councilor Kunst, um, staff would review... Would have to review that to take that. And from my recollection, I believe that compensation that was provided by the Conwest Group was a part of a rezoning application. Yeah. I think it was a, a different item here with respect to Nathan Creek, um, but we can distribute that. Yeah, I know it's in a different area. I'm just wondering if it's a similar type of project with, like, the salmon, salmon habitat. And I guess my next question is, is there an update on that particular, um, project? Um, through Your Worship, to Councilor Kunst. With respect to the first question, so this, uh, specific Nathan Creek Wetland, uh, project, the overall intention here is essentially a restoration proposal that would, uh, rehabilitate some of the, uh, areas here, um, and that, uh, uh, uh, due to, uh, some of the items, uh, the habitat being degraded during, uh, seasonal floodplain. Um, so yes and no. Some of the items do help with generally creek items, um, ensuring that, uh, there's, uh, rehabilitation and et cetera. Um, and with respect to the second question, that's, uh, uh, the update to provide is that that's... I believe was a part of a rezoning application, uh, with development prerequisites. And I believe the proponents are working through that. And, uh, that would, uh, um... And we can, uh, provide a status update on that once we, uh, are aware of where the rezoning application and the status of it. Okay, thank you. All right. Seeing no discussion, call the question on E2. That carries unanimously. Item E3, tree planting, canopy expansion update. I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Rent. Any discussion on E3? Councilor Kunst? Yeah. Um, so in Brookswood, we're, we're seeing, you know, a lot of sites, um, getting cleared. And I guess my question, uh, if we're going to be replanting, has there been any consideration to replant, like, cedars and Douglas firs, um, in Brookswood? Um, I know they're really big and they grow really big, but, um, it is sort of a, um, something that Brookswood is known for. So I was just wondering, do we plant those big trees anymore? Uh, through Your Worship, to Councilor Kunst. Um, staff essentially, when it comes to planning, we, we're following the, the 2022 comm- community force management strategy. So that essentially provides us a long-term plan for tree management within the township, and what, uh, the existing conditions of the canopies, and that sets our goals, targets, and actions. And I believe the attachment there shows general, uh, attachment B shows a general area where we will be planting. Um, and, and looking at the map here, it looks like it would be...... mostly in the northern established Brookswood that there's some green patches being shown. And some of the items you're r- referring to are, um, development applications. And there's some tree replacement items that are worked out, or, um, items that are w- development prerequisites or requirement pursuant to the neighborhood plan. So there's, eh, eh, an element of that, that there's either cash in lieu tree, cash in lieus, or, uh, replacement trees, a part of, uh, a, a development application. Okay. Thanks for that. But, um, do we plant Douglas firs and cedars anymore, anywhere as part of our tree ... management? Through your Worship, to Councilor Kearns, we'd have to check for that specific species. I think generally, we plant ... And Mr. Will might be able to confirm the, the tree species we currently plant. All right. Through your Worship, yeah, we do plant coniferous trees. Um, the specific species, I don't have with me, but st- I can check with staff and get back to you. Okay. Yeah, thank you. Counselor Ferguson. Thank you. I wanted to ask a question through the Chair a little bit of if I can. Uh, the planting program over the years, I know that we've had, uh, donations from organizations like CN and, uh, others. Have, have you got much ... Do you remember what's in the, the history of what we, uh, got from CN and where did we planted them, if I may? Uh, through your Worship, no, I'm not ... I don't have those details with me right now. Okay. We don't have to worry about that case. So the next thing i- we've got th- uh, s- as a motion, I know that we got, uh, quite a few trees, uh, from CN over the years. And, uh, it was a program funded by FCM as well, Federation of Canadian ... in conjunction with, uh, CN because they had an anniversary year. Okay. So I, I don't expect everybody to know that. And they planted them all throughout Langley, mostly Fort Langley. This particular motion, we are asking again for money from the FCM, Federation of Canadian Municipalities. And if we get that money, and of course there's a, a use for nonrefundable deposits. Um, is ... What are the chances o- of having a majority of those trees planted in, in urban areas, if I may? Through your Worship to Counselor Ferguson, uh, the, the general, the general map shows, uh, the area, but, uh, there is a high chance of them being planted in urban areas. Okay. Well, I noticed that, uh, they are but, uh, it's, it's, it certainly, uh, i- in a way, it certainly ... In, in the past it's been vo- ... As we've continued on, as, as, uh, another councilor has mentioned that, uh, the Brookswood area has been, uh, you know, uh, even though we have lots of trees, hasn't had a lot, b- probably because we haven't had an awful lot of development. But I just want to make sure that as we proceed accordingly that, uh, we can at least address urban planting. That's my only comment. Uh, th- that is correct. It, it ... We, we look at urban and rural planting both specifically. Thank you. Counselor Bailey. Yeah, I'd like to ... A couple of things I've seen in this. Uh, in the background history and the goals, the five goals that are listed there, I really like seeing that one of the goals is, uh, planting climate-resistant network of trees. Once upon a time, uh, I was a landscaper, so I know the type of tree that you put in a location is very important. So if you're gonna be, uh, not paying attention to climate resistance in the future, uh, then you're gonna be bound to fail. Just like if you're putting, uh, deciduous trees underneath where, uh, power lines are gonna go, you're gonna run into problems in the future. I, I, I'm glad to see that, uh, you've mentioned the tree voucher program and the uptick on that. Uh, that is great, but, uh, one thing that I didn't see in here is the seedlings that, uh, every year, uh, the township hands out. Uh, and I know they're there because myself and my grandchildren, uh, are replacing dying alders on our property with, uh, cedar seedlings. So, uh, it would, uh ... It's a, a program that I'm really glad to see that the, the township is participating in, especially that tree voucher program, which, uh, people are obviously really, uh, in favor of. Thank you. Counselor Whitmarsh. Yeah, thank you. Uh, um, just a question around, um, related to tree planting again. And, uh, in, in, in I think it was 2022, the Community Forest Management Strategy was adopted by council. And in that plan, there was a, um, uh, plan to increase the urban canopy from 23% to 30, which is actually a fairly, um ... I mean, at one level it doesn't seem that difficult, but it is a challenge when we continue to grow as a community, and at the same time that we're growing, we're gonna increase the canopy. So I guess my question was around, uh, this tree planting, which I'm ... I think is great. But I'm wondering, um, how much the Community Forest, um, Management Strategy informs, uh, for us when we ... Where and when we plant. And if the Community Forest Strategy is still the document that's g- helping to guide staff on, on increasing the urban canopy. Uh, through your Worship to Counselor Whitmarsh, uh, yes, we do heavily rely on that, uh, 2022 Community Forest Management Strategy. That essentially provides us th- the long term plan for the tree management within the township. And it's ... Uh, staff lean on that heavily when we're, um, doing the tree planting and canopy expansion as well. So I, I believe following the adoption of that strategy, it w- we've satisfied, uh, close to 27 of the 80 action items and, and continue to satisfy a lot of these action items as well. Uh, and some of the action items are highlighted within the report itself. Um, and, uh, it's, it, it is a guide but it's heavily relied upon as well. Right. Okay. Well, that's, that's great to hear. The, the, uh, the other question was that I know that the, the canopy was assessed, um-When, when we're building that, the, um, strategy, the canopy was assessed in 2021. What, what, how often is the canopy sort of reassessed? Uh, we're now at five years since the 2021 assessment of the canopy, and I'm wondering how often the canopy is assessed and, and is that reported at, um, back to council as to how the canopy is changing? Uh, to, to your Worship, to Councilor Whitmarsh, usually we, every five years, we get an update on where the canopy expansion is. Uh, and generally we're using that, uh, in taking it into consideration with in, in co- combination with the community force management strategy. The canopy itself not specifically given to council on its own. It would be either a part of the larger memo or a report to council if that an item of tree planting or canopy expansion is, um, on the, on the agenda. Okay. That's great. So, so did I under- do I understand that then this year, 2026, is sort of a year that we're gonna do another assessment of our urban canopy? To your Worship to Councilor Whitmarsh, th- that's correct. We'd be looking at it every five years, so since the last one was in 2022 as you have highlighted, we would be doing another, uh, review of it, uh, within 2026. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Pratt. Yeah, thank you Worship. I appreciate this, and appreciate Councilor Coon's question regarding the, uh, the sort of different types of trees. And I remember having a conversation on the, uh, the commercial application there on 208 just south of George Preston and asking if we could even get some deciduous trees there. And obviously staff provided some helpful rationale as to where and when it might be suitable. So obviously in Brookswood, I think unanimously we'd all love to see as much, uh, of the same type of tree go back in. And appreciate how successful the Tree Voucher Program is seeming to be. Uh, really commend staff on, on a really excellent roll-out and delivery of that program. And I'm just wondering as we're kinda discussing the tree canopy loss especially, uh, as we move forward in Brookswood potentially there, uh, you know, we've seen some of the applications that have been approved previously now, uh, resulting in some pretty significant canopy loss down on, uh, 32nd for example in Old Booth there. And I was wondering if planning staff, uh, could comment a little bit as to if there's policies or what policies have been introduced in the updated Brookswood Fernridge plans, uh, where, you know, there's, there's a little bit more, I will say, flexibility around hou- housing types or different policies that we put in place so that we can try and avoid as much canopy loss as we move forward in Brookswood and, and what those policies might look like. Through your Worship to Councilor Pratt, as you've highlighted that there's several policies that we have within each neighborhood plan within the Brookswood, uh, that essentially, um, relate to natural environment and climate change responses. So some of the policies include, uh, designation of, uh, several different properties, uh, within the nature conservation. Um, and then there's also, uh, policies with respect to neighborhood forestry as well that essentially would, um, take into consideration, um, increasing the canopy expansion and, uh, et cetera. And, and also there's designations of greenways and trails. Uh, we have an expansion of, uh, for example, the greenways, street and neighborhood edges, ecological greenways. We have Semiahmoo Trail, uh, which all take into consideration, um, uh, maintaining a lot of the tree canopy within Brookswood. Yeah, thank you. I appreciate that. If, uh, potentially, if you can correct my memory, it might be coming up again in the public hearing this evening, uh, regarding the township taking a proactive approach on some of the SPEA areas and the greenway areas along these, uh, stream side areas that actually go a little bit above and beyond what the federal and provincial governments would require so that we can protect a bit more of the tree canopy, uh, along these areas. Is that, is that something that's new to the Fernridge neighborhood plans this term? Uh, through your Worship to Councilor Pratt, that's, uh, uh, new to all the neighborhood plans. I believe that policy is the first of its kind within the Brookswood plan. Great. Thank you very much. Seeing no discussion, call to question on E3. Carries unanimously. Item E4 2026 special transit related road infrastructure program grant application. I'll move it, seconded by Councilor Pratt. Is there any discussion on E4? Councilor Pratt. Yeah, thank you Worship. Really pleased to see the TransLink's opening up, uh, the special intake for this. Really excited to see this service finally delivered to Gloucester now, and I just kinda commend you and, and, uh, the Mayor's Council for delivering this after a, a long waiting time. It's a lot of work and it's great to see, uh, such a great route through the heart of Gloucester as well with as many stops as we're seeing there, so that's great. Any other discussion on E4? Councilor Bailey. Yeah, I'm really glad on page two to see the attention that is paid, uh, to the concrete landing pads, uh, that are fully accessible for wheelchairs. So thank you very much for, uh, including that. Uh, that is, uh, something who, uh, people who deal with wheelchairs, whether they're in 'em or pushing 'em, uh, constantly have to deal with. So thank you very much for that. Thank you. Any others questions, questions on E4? Seeing none, call to question on E4. Carries unanimously. Item F1, bylaws for first and second reading. Will be community and neighborhood plan updates, bylaw number 6201, 6202, 6203, and 6226. I'll move the recommendation in the agenda, seconded by Councilor Pratt. Councilor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah, thank you Worship. Again, I wanted to thank staff for all the work and, uh, time that's been put into this plan, and, uh, the really robust engagement. And I appreciate the feedback that we got from, uh, lots of the community members at several rounds of open houses, and I do have a series of amendments, uh, once all speakers are exhausted. Go ahead now. Good to go? Go ahead. Yeah. Uh, Ms. Bauer, if you don't mind.Thank you. So the first series of amendments, uh, pertain to bylaw six two oh one, which is specific to the Willoughby Community Plan, so the overarching document. Uh, so these pertain to building heights and densities. And, uh, you'll see in brackets, I've itemized on the digital reports which page it can be found on, and then on the paper report, what page it's on. So, uh, this amendment would change the building heights for high density employment, uh, the base building height to six, as well as for medium density employment and medium density mixed use. Is there a seconder for that? No, I didn't think so. So, um, Council Pratt, you have moved that amendment? Yes. Yeah, I'll second that amendment. Is there any other question on that amendment? Councillor Lamberts? Yeah, just, um, just a reminder, what, what is the current, uh, base building height for these two items? Councillor Pratt, go ahead. Uh, for high density employment it is 12, and for the other two, it's eight. Okay, thank you. All right, seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on that amendment. That carries unanimously. Councillor Pratt, go ahead. Thank you. Uh, the next amendment relates to financing, uh, section 9.1 in the Willoughby Community Plan, and it would amend that section to include the paragraph in bold. So moved. I'll second it, go ahead. Yeah, so the, uh, paragraph in bold, uh, I won't read it out in its entirety. Effectively, it would add the interim policy regarding community amenity contributions to the Willoughby Community Plan as a possible financing option. All right, is there any questions or discussion on that amendment? Councillor Curtis. Yeah, I guess (clears throat) it would be more the legal aspect of this, and has this been, um, vetted by, by legal? Council Pratt, I believe you pulled this language from another plan, isn't it? Uh, this language exists in bylaw six two oh two, which is the Willoughby Transit Corridor Plan. So I think it's mirroring it to another location. Councillor Curtis, if you have any other questions, happy to pass them through to staff. Yeah, no, at this point that's... All right, any other questions or discussion? Seeing none, call the question on that amendment. That carries unanimously. Councillor Pratt? Thank you. Uh, so the next series of amendments are related to bylaw six two oh two, which is the Willoughby Transit Corridor Plan. Again, these relate to building heights and densities. Motion to move that. So moved. Seconded by Councillor Ferguson. So the first there, section 3.4, high density employment, it is a similar change to that was made for six two oh one, reducing the base building height, uh, for high density employment from 12 to six stories. The second does the same for medium density mixed use, but from eight to six. And for the following two, it amends sections 3.7 and 3.8 to remove the base densities from both. All right, any questions or discussion on this amendment? Councillor Martins? Thank you. Um, if I could get some more information on why we're looking at reducing the stories? Councillor Pratt, do you wish to answer that? Uh, for myself, looking at the plan, uh, I wanna be realistic about, uh, expectations as well as, for me, it's a planning principle and the base building height, uh, is, is not something that, uh, the proponent can't pursue if they want 12. Uh, but the base building height embedded in the plan, in this case, would simply be six. Okay. No, I appreciate that clarification. Um, so these are along the way on certain areas on the corridor plan, I'm assuming? Um, and if so, is it possible to have a slide brought up so we can see what it is we're looking at? Or if I'm misunderstanding this? Mm. Councillor Pratt, do you have a page reference you could put, the map would be on maybe? So these, uh, one moment please. Yep, go ahead. So these aren't, uh, map-related changes. These would be policy-related changes. Oh yeah, that's right. Okay, yeah. So there will be map-related changes coming later. And so, on those map changes, uh, it does show where high density, medium density, mixed use and employment are, as well as low density, mixed use and low density residential, but these are specific policy changes. Thank you for that clarification. Sure. Any other questions or discussion on that amendment? Seeing none, call the question on that amendment. That carries unanimously. Councillor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. So the next series of changes are land use changes to the maps. And, uh, I do, uh... Oh, I think Ms. Bauer is able to bring up the map so we can follow along a little simpler. And that one there is fine as well. The integrated concept plan's probably fine. There's the whole corridor. There you go. Yeah, that's perfect. So- Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Thank you. Uh, so these land use map changes will change bylaw six two oh two, maps 1A, 1B, II and V. And will, if passed, would require amendments to map one and two of the Willoughby Community Plan, which is bylaw six two oh one. Uh, they all flow together. So, looking east of 200th Street, uh, 75, 7450 200th Street, uh, would be redesignated low density residential instead of medium density mixed use. That property is, uh, south of the LEC, north of 74th Avenue. Uh, there's a series here, I don't know if it's possible, I've obviously did not have the wording up at the same time as the map. So do you want me to take these on one at a time, or? Flip back and forth? Yeah. There we are. You can go back to the map with his question. Yeah. So, east of 200th Street, that the following property be designated low density residential instead of medium density mixed use. I'll move that first one.Or do you want me to move them all at a time? I think it's all moved. Yep. Or, it was already moved and seconded. Is that correct? Oh, perfect. So if people wish to move the vision or amendments, they can ... You can still go ahead and speak, yeah. Okay. I'm happy to read through them all at this, I, yeah. Can you just fastly explain them all? Perfect. And what parts of Council some changes? So then low density residential instead of mid- medium density mixed use, it provides the same height, uh, allowances, as well as similar density allowances. It simply removes the mixed use component, uh, for that one property. Uh, for the subsequent one, designating it medium density mixed use instead of high density mixed use, it, uh, retains the mixed use component to that property, but simply reduces the base building height. And then the following properties, 7412, 7432 200th Street, as well as 7415 202A and 7441 202A would be redesignated from medium density mixed use to row house/townhouse. And then lastly, the designation, uh, for s- properties 7495, 751, uh, 41, 7591 202A Street, would all be split, uh, designations with medium density mixed use remaining fronting the future 201 Street, south of the Langley Event Center, with the eastern portions of these properties designated row house/townhouse fronting 202 Street, and also fronting the townhouse designations on the other side of the street in the Yorkson neighborhood. So I'll move those and then we'll- Yep. ... handle the west of 200th Street ones after. More questions, Councilor? Councilor Ritz. Thank you. Um, and if I may ask the mover, if that's possible, through the chair, um, this is some pretty detailed, um, analysis, a full page of addresses. This is the first time I'm seeing, laying eyes on this. Um, could you maybe, um, give some more information as to why you've, um, broken it down property by property? Whose properties they are, or why we're doing this? Um, it seems very specific for a plan. So obviously you wanna, you wanna highlight- Yeah, I think those are, those are good. I'll turn it over to Council Pratt. I wanna highlight for everyone, this is first and second, so this would be heading as amended, if amended, it's been amended a couple times already, it would be heading to the public hearing. Mm-hmm. With that amended and you would have that amended version with the updated land use map at the public hearing and consideration of third reading, that would have that all laid out for you. Um, and then if people wanna debate it further at that time, they could certainly, uh, look to change something back or change something further based on public input. Councilor Martins, go ahead. Yeah. Um, thank you. Um, yes, I do appreciate that process, but i- it still begs the question, uh, why we've got such a list of specific addresses? Why? Yep, I'm happy to- Why them? ... pass it over to Councilor Pratt for that. Councilor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. Uh, if it was possible, Ms. Bauer, I'm sorry to keep doing this to you. Uh, if w- we could bring the map up, and then I can explain. Yeah. So if everybody can orient themselves, 76th Avenue, uh, at the south end of the Langley Event Center campus there, 200th Street to 202B or 202A, uh, there is a section of dark brown and lighter brown. And so what this is doing, these changes would be providing a slightly more gradual transition from the single family neighborhood to the south, as well as the potential, uh, special study area to the east. Instead of abruptly going from single family homes to mixed use apartments, uh, the changes to row house/townhouse would provide a more gradual transition from the single family to greater density. And then the changes to, uh, the other typologies, I'll basically keep it condo, uh, but simply, again, add a more gradual transition, so you're not having the, uh, uh, abrupt single family to condo transition. Oh. Question? Yeah. Thank you. And I, I appreciate you walking us through that with the... A, a picture's always worth a thousand words, so, um, that's good. So I, I think what I'm trying to understand though, I thought originally, um, we were looking at the 200th Street corridor with BRT, et cetera, et cetera, um, as wanting to keep the density along that corridor and, and gradually work away from it as you worked w- west or east. Um, so it seems like we're kinda taking a step back on this. Um, I, I also appreciate that the economics of things these days, um, I think it's, uh, difficult building the condo buildings. My understanding is that, um, the stock is not moving, um, and there may be more demand for, um, th- these sorts of properties, so I appreciate that. Um, I just worry that we're, um, a- missing out on an opportunity of where we wanted to densify along 200th, and that was part of the point of the BRT, et cetera. Um, but, uh, uh, Mr. Mayor, as you said earlier, I am amenable to, um, receiving the updates, um, before the next meeting, and, uh, considering it further then. And, um, I can take this offline and speak further with the mover if I have further questions. Thank you. Yeah, the process would be these amendments would be added to the document, which would be provided to the public hearing, and we would all get an updated version, including the public. Yeah. Councilor Koos? Um, yeah. So, uh, similar in, in question. Um, the... If a developer wanted to increase the density, what would be the process for that? The process would be to apply for an OCP amendment for greater density. And then would there be an amenity charge negotiated as in the past maybe we would... Is it a density bonus? Yeah. Mr. Kunert, if the, if the person applies, if the individual applies today or in a few months if this plan is adopted, what's the process in regards to bonus density benefit? Uh, to your worship, it, it would depend on when the proponent has applied, um, and if it's subsequent to the ACC bylaw or prior to the ACC bylaw, and then whether the item is plan compliant or not. Um, that would then, um, see whether there's bonus density applicable, which then we would, uh, review, uh, that item in conjun- in conjunction with the interim CAC policySo as it would be right now, if we kept it this way, there would be no bonus density, right? If they wanted to keep that density, that would be... There would be nothing to negotiate. I guess what- Yeah. The trade-off would be also the potential for a public hearing or greater certainty about what their designation is. So if the minimum density is eight stories, um, I don't know of anyone building an eight-story building. So they lose flexibility in some ways that they have to apply for more than eight even if they don't want it. So when it lowers it to six, it provides, I think, some greater flexibility. So it'd really be your determination whether you want to force someone into a greater density situation, which is what, is what's occurring without the amendment. Councilor Pratt, did you wish to ask about? Yeah. And so for the medium density, uh, designations within the WTCP, uh, regardless of whether or not they build a eight or six, it matters on the FSR calculation with the base density to the allowable greatest density, if there is a density bonus, uh, a- a- applied or charged on that, because, uh, i- it will completely depend on, yeah, the timing of the application, if they're within the ACC bylaw or not, and s- and subject to density bonus program. Okay. Good? Go ahead. Oh, yeah. No, thanks. I, I... That's why I'm just, uh, you know, curious as to why we're reducing the density. But I get the economic challenges right now with, uh, with building and, and, um, so... Yeah, thank you. All right. Any other discussion on that amendment? Ms. Bauer, could you please bring back up the amendment? There we... Any other discussion or questions on that amendment? I see none. I'll call the question on that amendment to F1. That carries unanimously. Councilor Pratt, did you have any more? I did. Did you? Okay. Councilor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah, a little bit... Uh, sorry, Ms. Bauer, if we could scroll up just slightly, there were a couple more, um, w- for the west of... Yeah, the very bottom, all right? The west of 200th Street, uh, that a- all lands between 198B Street and 199A Street, from 73A to 75A Avenue be designated a row house townhouse, and that the lands between 199A and 200th Street be designated low density residential. And, uh- Second it. Go ahead. If it was possible, again, just switch the map. Thank you very much. Uh, so similar neck of the woods, but on the other side of 200th Street, if you orient yourself to 76th Avenue again, you'll see the dark brown. A little bit to the south of that, there is a, uh, road that truncates there. That is the future 199A, and that will continue south, uh, to the curved road there, sort of north of 72nd Avenue. Uh, this amendment would make the light brown rectangle to the west of that road, row house townhouse, with the remaining narrower rectangle fronting 200th Street, low density residential apartment. Any questions or discussions? Bauer, can you go back to the amendment, please? Okay. Any other questions or discussions? Oh, I see none. Call the question on that amendment. That carries unanimously. Councilor Pratt. Perfect. Thank you. Uh, so the next two amendments, again, on the Willoughby Transit Corridor Plan relate to high streets. So folks might have noticed in the c- new, uh, corridor plan mention of high streets. These are areas with a little bit more, um, specific design and special typology on the road to make them more pedestrian-friendly, make them more welcoming, make them more inviting for, uh, residents and visitors and tourists, in areas that are close to the BRT stops that are gonna come or in, uh, sort of unique areas like the Langley Event Centre. So what this would do is introduce a new high street, uh, along the future 201 Street immediately south of the Langley Event Centre, between 74B and 76th Avenue, uh, so that it provides a bit of a southern gateway to the Langley Event Centre, and that the high street itself, uh, be given criteria and characteristics based on the current high street that you see at 76th Avenue. Now that 76th Avenue High Street, west of 200th Street is obviously not complete because there's not a finished development on the south side, but it gives you a sense of what would be there on the north side. So, so moved. Don't know if that was seconded yet. I'll second that as well. Uh, any questions or discussion on that? Yeah. Seeing none, call the question on that amendment. Councilors unanimously. Councilor Pratt. Thank you. Uh, the next series of amendments, again, on the Willoughby Transit Corridor Plan relate to schools and parks. And the first would be that Section 3.11 school be amended with the following amendments, and you can see that sentence in bold, that a floating symbol indicates po- potential sites for future, future urban school locations. Uh, do you want me to move all three of these again at the same time? Just move them as one, yeah. Yeah, I'll move them all as one, then. Uh, I'll second it. Thank you. So the second, uh, bullet point there, it itemizes three possible locations for future urban schools th- that should be considered. And then the last paragraph updates, uh, section eight in that transit corridor plan, with the sentence in bold at the end. Any questions or discussion on that amendment? Yeah, sure. Go ahead. Just request to speak and then you can hold it for as long as you need. Go ahead. Yeah. Mic's on, just let us know when you're prepared to Oh, thank you. Yeah, no, I just, uh, wanted some time- Okay. ... to digest the information.Thank you. Yeah, no questions from me. All right. Thanks. Any other questions or thoughts on this? I certainly agree with this one. Uh, there's, uh, a bit of a transition from designated sites to, uh, potentially looking at some flexibility around urban schools. And I think there's some nuance here, which, uh, certainly is a... Think appropriate to take to a public hearing. Uh, Councilor Pratt, did you have more? No. I had one more amendment. One more amendment. All right, so I'll call the question on that amendment. That carries unanimously. Councilor Pratt, go ahead. Last but not least, bylaw 6203 is the Gordon Neighborhood Plan. Uh, the first series of changes relate to land use. The second relates to on-street parking, and then the third is a minor, uh, text change relating to, uh, the size that, uh, certain commercial units are limited to and are allowed to be rented out for. All right. You wanna move all three? Yes. All right. Is there... I'll second them. Yeah. Okay, so the first series of land use changes, uh, the current designation for row house, townhouse, and f-... Row house, townhouse, live/work in the Gordon Neighborhood Plan, or the New Gordon Neighborhood Plan, allow up to 2020... Or 22 UPA, and the change, uh, in that first bullet point would increase that to 24 UPA and it itemizes, itemizes a number of places in the plan, uh, where other references to 22 UPA would have to be changed. Uh, the second bullet point, uh, would openly designate the property at 6790 208 Street as park, and itemizes which maps would have to be changed. And then the third bullet point, there is a list of properties, uh, and I believe, uh, Ms. Bower, that we might have the Gordon map. I'm not sure if we do or not. We can still- We'll go to the map if you wanna read all the items, and then we'll go to the map. That's all right. You can go back to it. This is... No, we can... We'll just deal with the first three, I think, right? No, we'll do, we'll just- Okay. ... go through them all, and then we'll go to the- Sure. ... map if there's any questions. Yeah, go ahead. Uh, then the second on-street, or the, the on-street parking, uh, bullet point there, there's a table on, uh, the digital report, page 332, that itemizes different sections of road in the Gordon area, and itemizes different characteristics as well as whether or not street parking may be considered on that road. And this would change the designation of no to maybe for 208 Street, uh, from 62nd, or sorry, from 67th to 72nd and from... And along 72nd Avenue. And then the last change is, uh, the change there for Gordon Neighborhood, uh, uh, General Medium Density Mixed Use Designation, uh, that, uh, commercial units should not exceed 1,000 square feet for any one commercial tenant, and then the change would be unless for restaurant and/or cafe use. All right. So, Ms. Bower, do you wanna bring up the map now, please? Great. So maybe, maybe refresh our memories on the- Yeah. ... uh, map regarding the designation for townhouse changes. So the designation for townhouse changes, if you can orient yourselves to, um... That is 204th. So on the left-hand side of the Gordon Plan there, you'll see the number five. Then there is a square of yellow immediately above that number five that is currently designated for single family, 8 UPA. This would change that block to be contiguous in designation with its surroundings, which are row house, townhouse, 15 UPA. All right. Anything else, Councilor Pratt? That's it. Another question, Councilor Martins? Yeah. Um, I do have a couple questions. Okay. Um, uh, starting with what you- the mover just mentioned, um, the block to the north, I guess, that's of number five. Um, c- could, if I could, through the chair to staff, ask why it was, um, different, um, that it had lower, uh, density in that area? Mr. Cooper. The yellow block above number five, so right over on the left-hand side. We're looking at changing it all so it's all that same light orange color, I suppose. Is that correct? Yeah. Through your worship, through Councilor Martins, I believe just historically, that would, that designation just remained as single family, and, uh, uh, at the time, uh, during the planning exercise, it just seemed to be an appropriate designation, and, uh, and now I believe there's just, uh, consistency, or just, uh, to ensure that, uh, the neighboring land uses are, uh, consistent with that, uh, amendment. I think that's just what's being proposed. Okay. Um, all right. Um, next question I have is about the on-street parking on 208. Um, now, i- will that- And we can go back, we can go back to that amendment, Ms. Bower. You can pre- br- bring up that specific amendment. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, and I know you said from not to maybe. Um, would that be, um, 24 hours a day, or are you looking for something like the Broadway Corridor, uh, something where, you know, after certain hours, um, the right lane is used for parking, or if I could get some more insight on that? Councilor Pratt? I think those are very valid questions, and the reason why it's going from no to maybe is so that we can at least have that conversation without, uh, it being an abrupt no. Thank you. And then my final question for you is, um, the... Your final point in the other, uh, s- uh, commercial units not to exceed 93 meters squared for any one commercial tenant unless for restaurant and/or cafe use. Could you speak more...... To that, if I may, through the chair? Yeah. Yeah, go ahead. Uh, typically, from what I've seen in, in other d- buildings and just across the lower mainland, uh, restaurants and cafes can occasionally require more than 1,000 square feet to be able to operate. And I don't want to overly prescribe what can or cannot go in a certain area when this, uh, neighborhood. Uh, the area where there's the most concentration of commercial that's d- proposed, uh, I, I think it'd be perfectly appropriate that there could be a commercial, uh, or a, sorry, a cafe or a restaurant that might wanna go in there. And if they don't have enough space that's adequately available to them, then that might limit them from even looking at that neighborhood, and I think we wanna promote and encourage a variety of uses across every commercial neighborhood in the township. Okay, um- Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, so, um, I'm just wondering, though, um, are we... Are we confident that only restaurants and cafes might need more space? Um, I- it just seems very specific to me, um, a- when it's worded like that. So- Yeah, so I think the amendment's trying to move it in the direction, if you wish to look at third reading, or even now, if you wish to remove the restriction entirely, that we could deal with that as a separate amendment. Or if you wanna, uh, loosen the language even further, such that, uh, you know, with other consideration of other uses that may be able to demonstrate a need, like if you wish to make a, another amendment after we process this one, to, uh... Or we could inquire, you know, what is the logic for small-scale commercial units, you know, looking to restrict them to that area, versus letting the private market dictate... You know, versus a grocery store or something large. You know, what is the harm of a 1,500-square-foot retail unit? Right? And what would be the reason to restrict it? We could certainly inquire if this amendment's, uh, approved. We could certainly follow up on that- Yeah, thank you. I, I- ... separately from this amendment. Yeah, no. I, I... Thank you, and I appreciate that 'cause I, I appreciate the spirit of wanting to be open to, um, going outside of the current restrictions, but perhaps we could change that wording to be a little bit more, um, uh, available to not just those specific uses. All right. We'll come back to that. Uh, Councilor Whitmarsh. Yeah, (clears throat) I wonder if we just go back to the Gordon Neighborhood Plan, uh, map. Yeah, thank you, just so... My, my question is following up on, uh, questions around the, um, single family use just above the number five there. Um, on this map, we have a red line going through. I just wanted to make sure that it's the above, the part above number five, but also the part just to the right of that same section. Is that, is that, um... Is the amendment calling for that to also be, or just- No, I believe the amendment is only to the west of 204th. Yeah, just west of that road. Okay. It's not including that, uh, half-built portion of the property there So, we still have a small little section of single family- It's all built. It's all built. ... pinch p- Uh, that's, uh, been built already? Yeah. Oh. And that's been, that's come up this term, earlier this term, given that that area, that that L road is installed, that I think, believe council endorsed l- letting it complete in that form- Okay. ... based on that road being partially constructed. Yeah. Thank you. The second question I had around that was that the other, the gray area's a special study area. Um, what's the, um, what's the intention of that, or what's the reason for it being a special study area? Mr. Clerk? That's a good question. It's kinda light gray, just to the... It'd be the, just to the east of the property we were just talking about. It's not really the subject of the amendment, but we can certainly answer the question now, Mr. Clerk. Go ahead. Y- Yes, your, your Worship to Councilor Whitmarsh, that, uh, designation, the special study area. Special study area designation just, uh, uh, essentially allows that there might be further review of that specific neighborhood. Our, uh, staff will look at it if there's further direction given by council. So, there's just a special study area designation, which allows a lot of flexibility in the event there's specific direction given for that c- uh, s- specific area or catchment. Okay. All right, thank you. All right. Seeing... Ms. Bauer, can you bring s- bring back the amendment? Any other discussion or questions on that amendment? I see none. Call the question on that amendment. Council Pratt, is there any further? That's it. That's it? Is there... Did any... Do you wish to follow up on any item raised so far? Yup, Council Martins? Thank you. Go ahead. Um, j- just going back to this last amendment, the last point, um, where it's, um, says, "Unless for restaurant and/or cafe use." I'd like to, uh, soften that a bit. Um- Oh, you're going back to that? Uh, Mr. Mayor, I think you had a good wording that you said earlier. (laughs) Yeah. Maybe we, maybe, maybe staff can review what was the... So, if, if the council's clearly looking and interested in getting public feedback on that, uh, exclusion- (coughs) ... for restaurants or cafe use, is there... What is the original logic for the small scale restriction to 1,000 square feet in that area? Uh, to Your Worship, uh, to Councilor Martins, or to, to Your Worship directly, I believe the logic was just to ensure that there's no, um, large, um, anchor tenants or large grocery stores. That was the intention, uh, not to have th- that, uh, uh, i- in this specific area. So, you know, Councilor Martins, one way to deal with that, if you could please bring back up that. We'll just mirror that language, Mr. Clark. Yeah. Uh, you could amend this sentence with a subsequent amendment now, because here it is as amended. Uh, one simple amendment is to increase the, the 1,000 square foot to something much larger, potentially 1,500 or 1,800, which will capture a wider range of retail, but would prevent that larger unit, such as a, a, a smaller grocery store. So, you could do that, or you could, uh, move to remove it entirely. Up to you.Yeah, uh, so I don't wanna move it... Remove it entirely, because I appreciate that there might be flexibility needed for, um, larger spaces. Um, so, uh, you were saying 1,500, uh, square feet? 1,800 square feet. I mean, if the... If the goal is to prevent a much larger unit, I mean, I think we're seeing some units, like for doctor's offices or, um, (clicks tongue) you know, other s- personal services may require more space than that, if that's the goal that you're looking for. Yeah. Okay. Well, then, uh, uh, I would like to move an amendment then, that we increase that, the base amount, to 1,500 square feet. All right. Does anybody wish to second that? Seconded by Councillor Kunzt, yeah. (laughs) Do you wish to speak to it further? Nope. Nope? Councillor Pratt? All right. That was good. I think, I... Yes, but I think Councillor Widmarsh had his- The system just went to you. Oh, okay. That's fine. I can talk after. Councillor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah. Thank you, Your Worship. Uh, I appreciate the, the intent of this. Um, for myself, the reason why I specifically honed in on restaurant and/or cafe in the original amendment was in the paragraph above this, uh, bullet point in the actual Gordon Plan. Uh, staff have itemized a, a list of small-scale commercial activities they're contemplating, in- including financial institutions, medical and professional offices, convenience stores, retail shops, delicatessens, bakeries, barbershops, beauty salons, dry cleaning and laundromat establishments, restaurants and cafes, fitness centers, and veterinary clinic- clinics. Gas stations are not permitted. Um, so for myself, I... When I looked at that list and when I reviewed what the commercial zoning bylaws that we typically see in c- uh, comprehensive development zones allow, just based on feedback I've gotten or I'm sure we've all gotten from the general public around, uh, let's call it an over-proliferation of certain types of commercial retail uses, uh, that, you know, they don't generate a lot of foot traffic per se, or were... You know, we're losing out on spaces that could be used for other things. Didn't really wanna open the can of worms to having too large of an establishment that, you know, for example, can be somewhere else. And we'd lose an entire set of commercial units here in this one neighborhood to one use, and, you know, limit it to not having a restaurant here or a cafe here. So, I appreciate the intent. Um, you know, I don't see too many laundromats opening up anymore, so maybe we won't get the 1,500-square-foot laundromat that, you know, could theoretically go in here now. But I, I appreciate the intent, and, uh, we'll, we'll see it at... Go to third and get the public hearing input on it and, uh, discuss it from there. Councillor Barnes? Yeah. Um, I'm okay with leaving it as is, as well, um, and then seeing what t- the public has to say. Um, the one thing I would say is, um, I appreciate wanting to keep units small and not having a large unit take over an entire block. But on the other hand, um, (clicks tongue) i- i- i- i- I- it's, um... When it comes to grocery retail, I know you mentioned that one as an example, Councillor Pratt, um... So right now, we've got two grocery stores in Walnut Grove. Um, and then we have one, small one, in all of Willoughby and then not down to the bottom of the s- uh, slope, um, with Costco, Superstore, that sort of thing. And, um, to keep people local in their, their neighborhoods, it would be nice to see another grocery store in that area actually. Um, but of course, if nobody's, um, applying to build them, that's a different story. So, I- I'm really okay with either way on this, um, but I would like to hear more from the public on, on what it is they would like to see in these units. Councillor Widmarsh? Yeah. I guess, I, I, I'm supportive of moving it to 1,500. I think 1,000's quite small. Um, and to move it to 1,500. And then, of course, we're gonna allow the public to have input on that. But that would be my, uh, choice. Uh, certainly, um... C- can there be... I know there's a BC building code rationale for the 1,000 square feet or some other rationale for why that's chosen versus something else? Uh, to Your Worship, I believe the overall intent was to just limit the large anchor grocery stores. But, uh... And then w- with respect to just reviewing sizes, um, when it comes to a lot of the small businesses, m- most of them, uh, the square footage being used in some of these small business r- uh, units were, uh, less than 1,000 square feet. So, uh, the number was then 1,000 square feet was used, um, a- as, uh, the size. Yeah. So I'm also... I'll, I'll be supporting it. I- I'm not too concerned, but I think generally people could always apply for us, even if they're looking for different things. But generally, uh, let the private market sort out what it, what it wants to do with some of these units, uh, separate from some of the larger uses that may dominate a, a neighborhood, uh, in a way that's not desired. So, without a call to question on the amendment... It carries unanimously. Is there any other questions or discussion on F1 as amended? If you could take that down for us. Yeah. Is there anything else on F1? Councillor Kunzt. Um, when will the public hearing be scheduled? Uh, to Your Worship, to Councillor Kunzt, it would be the, the next council meeting, which would be June 15th. Okay. So, I guess my next question would be, what is the process for communicating some of these changes to the development community and to the people who may wanna weigh in on how this might impact their... Either their property or, or to, you know, whatever it is that, you know, pertains to them? Uh, to Your Worship, to Councillor Kunzt, to the... That would be on the website, and the maps would be updated and the policies would be updated and available to the public. And then so the website would have that. And then the public hearing itself, it would be the opportunity for members of the public, uh, or, uh, to make any submissions with respect to either the amendments or the plan itself.So do they get a notice, like, you know, when we have, you know, like cards go in the mail for, like properties that are surrounded by that particular, um... (clears throat) If we had a rezoning or if we had, like a property thing that we're changing, they don't get a notice? T- your Worship to Council can s- it, it would be advertised and, and there would be notice of the public hearing itself, um, a- and that, that process would be followed just as the same process for every neighborhood plan updates or community plan updates. Does the urban, uh, the Urban Institute... I can't... UDI, do they get a chance to take a look at, at these, um, changes? 'Cause they, they seem to have a way to sort of distribute information maybe. Does it go to them? Or are they just watching? (laughs). Okay, thank you. Seeing no discussion, we'll call the question on F1 as amended. Carries unanimously. W- yeah. Bylaws for first, second, and third reading. Housing agreement bylaw number 6222. I'll move it, seconded by Councillor Pratt. Any discussion on G1? Councillor Kunzt. Yeah, I do have a (clears throat) question on G1. One sec here. Just let me get my notes here. Um, so yeah, given the partnership with the province and the BC Builds, can staff clarify, uh, what protections or limitations exist within the housing agreement, uh, regarding the future use of these units? Uh, for example, could the province require or request that some or all of the units be converted to either supportive housing or seniors housing or another model that's different from what council is approving today? Uh, s- sorry. T- Your Worship, through Council Kunzt, could you just repeat the question there? So (clears throat) right now, we're, we... It's specific use. Can the province mandate us, you know, in the future that these, um, units... Right now, they're, you know, for a different use than... Maybe I'm talking about, like supportive housing or seniors housing. Can they change the use, uh, that we've agreed on today? Well, t- your Worship, to Councillor Kunzt, this is specifically in the housing agreement. The housing agreement itself would be registered. Um, a- and there's a specific bylaw. Um, if there's any changes to that, th- that would require, uh, it to go back to council, or specifically, if there's, um, any changes to the land use element as well, that would require rezoning. So, um, it would have to be through a formal process, um, if there's any changes to be made. So, I guess no. As it... J- Your Worship, to Councillor Kunzt, generally speaking, no, unless there's an agreement with all the parties and there's a formal process, uh, to go through. Okay. I was just reminded that, you know, sometimes we're creatures of the province and we're told to do things. So thank you. Councillor Barnes? Yeah, thank you. Um, if my information's correct from the, uh, other projects that we've already got underway, um, through the BC Builds program, um, 30% of units for those projects are 20% below market rate. Is that correct? T- Your Worship, to Councillor Martins, I believe so. That's, uh, generally speaking- Okay. ... w- what the... All right. So for the... But I notice in this one, on this particular project, there will only be 10%, um, below market rate. Um, am I reading that correctly? And if so, wondering why this one is different. Uh, T- Your Worship, to Councillor Martins, the... At least 30% of the dwellings must be rented to tenants for rents that are at 10% below CHMC Langley median rents. Okay. So that, that's what it... It states in the covenant. 50%, you said? No, sorry. So at least 30% of the dwelling units must be rented to tenants for rents that are 10% below its CHMC Langley median rents. Right. So in the other projects, it's 20% below. Um, uh, so I'm just wondering why there's a difference with this one. Uh, t- Your Worship, to you, Councillor Martins, the... There's a definition, uh, difference within what CH- CHMC Langley median rent is and CHMC units. Rather than the other ones, there's just a general definition for all the BC Builds. So that's why they're just ensuring that, um, because there's a difference in what the median rent would be based on the CHMC Langley median rent. Uh, and, uh, there's a difference between that and the actual BC Builds definition of what, uh, uh, a below market rent is. Okay, thank you. Um, 'cause I read that and it just looked like we were, um, ma- moving maybe towards becoming a market rate housing developer, and I don't think that's the intention of these, um, particular, uh, developments. Um, and then I'm just trying to wrap my head around, um, uh, owner, uh, owner of the property versus leasehold owner, um, and the implications of the, uh, debt. So the Township of Langley is the... Still the owner of the property, and the housing authority is the leasehold owner. Is that correct? Uh, that, that is correct. Okay. Uh, so the mortgage owing to BC Housing would be a lien against the township's land, not against the, um, housing authority's building? I think it'd be a lien against the leasehold interest, Mr. Carter. Th- That is correct. Uh, the... It would be against the leasehold interest. Okay. So I'm...Just considering worst-case scenario, um, if, um, the housing authority has to default on that mortgage, um, what, what happens? For, uh, like, how does that impact the township? Uh, through Your Worship to Councillor, uh, Martins. That, that's, those scenarios, I believe, are all, um, a part of a contribution agreement and highlighted, I believe, in other documents that, uh, uh, the society or the township has either entered into. Okay. Sorry. I don't think I caught their, um, what happens if the, the housing society defaults. Um, is the township on the hook? Um, do we lose our property? Um, wh- wh- what's the potential outcome of that? So, through Your Worship to Councillor Martins, that items, with respect to defaults, legal agreements, those items would be, uh, the scenarios with that are either within the agreements itself, with the Township of, of Langley Housing Trust Society, or with any agreements with the Township of Langley itself. And those items would essentially be considered, uh, section 90 items, closed session items as well. Fair. Yeah, fair enough. Um, okay. And then, um, uh, Councillor Kunz mentioned it earlier, and, um, I have the same concern. Um, are there sufficient safeguards in place to ensure that the project remains housing for, um, the missing middle as the intention of the BC Builds program, um, for the long term? Um, do we run the risk of it being rebranded for h- you know, to some other form of housing? Uh, I think that risk does exist, so I think it would rely on having a good council. Sorry, so what are the safeguards? I think it would rely on having a good council. So- And that, that the, um, housing agreements run with the land. So they would be up to the council to live up to the housing agreements or go further than the housing agreements, and up to the council what they do with them. So I think it'd be very dependent on having a council that values the Langley Housing Trust. Okay. Um, so I, I, I'm gonna go back to Councillor Kunz' comments again, um, because we are a creature of the province. And that is my concern, that, um, that final say would not rest with any council. Um, so I'm just wondering what sort of safeguards are in place. Or if there are- There's agree, there's agreements in place with contractual agreements with the province that are in place. I'm not aware of this hypothetical situation that you're both suggesting ever occurring in the entire Province of British Columbia. If you can find one, that, that'd be great to review that. So I'm just asking for an answer. Uh, do we have safeguards in place? Uh, um, I'm not trying to politic here, I'm just trying to ensure. So do we? Yes. Thank you. That was my question. Yes. Thank you. So, as, yes. Th- these are the housing agreements that are in place. And as you've noted, there's certain percentage requirements, and it'll be up to having a council that values the Langley Housing Trust. Councillor Ferguson. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I mean, it is, eh, very, very clear that we've always been a, a, a child of the pro- under the Municipal Act and Local, um, Government Act. And, um, I, I think it's fair to say, whether it's a, a school or a highway or a, we have an international border in Langley, and the list goes on and on and on. And I think that it's important and incumbent upon us as a council to have the right appropriate staff in place that understands our agreements between the provincial government. I know we have a lawyer on, uh, on staff, and we have senior staff that are always negotiating and working with the province. Because we've always, and we're not different than Surrey or Vancouver or Port Coquitlam or anybody within the... Or even, uh, Vernon or, or Kelowna. Uh, we've always been a, a child of the province, and I, I think it's important, as the mayor has said, that we have a, uh, good council going forward that's gonna be aware of, of how we work with, uh, senior levels of government. Thank you. Councillor Kerzt? Yeah. Yeah, thanks for the discussion. Seeing as how this is actually new for Langley, it's good to actually get that right on the table and so that everybody is aware. Um, you know, I just had one other, uh, question. And it's actually more just a, you know, uh... It says here, "Priority agreement language has also been added to ensure the agreement rank in priority over other financial items." What does that actually mean? Yeah. Mr. Kerr. Through Your Worship to you, Councillor Kunz, it's just protecting the priority, uh, s- interest of CHMC. So if there's any other financial instruments, they would have priority over them. Um, that's, that's a standard, I, I believe, clause when it comes to any housing agreements. And the Section 219, um, Housing Agreement was approved by council. There's just certain housekeeping items that CHMC has requested just to be included. That's, uh, that's the only reason we are bringing this forward again. But this was historically, I believe, approved by council already. Okay. Thank you. And I, I do appreciate that, uh, answer. Thank you. All right. So obviously, I support it. I think it's, uh, it's good to get this project to this stage. It's been a little bit slower than the others, and I share the concerns. So I think it's gonna be great to, to have some of that, uh, additional context and discussion. It's a bit ironic hearing from people that voted against forming the Langley Housing Trust to begin with, now very concerned about the Langley Housing Trust. Uh, it's a bit ironic. And, and honestly, it'll be up to the public to educate themselves on that. I'm calling the question on G-One. That carries unanimously. Does anybody wish to make a Mayor and Council Report? Councillor Martens. Thank you. Um, yeah. So, and I did support the Housing Trust, so that's great. Um- No, actually, that's not correct. You voted against forming the Langley Housing Trust. No, I didn't. Yes, you did. Nope. Go ahead, Councillor Martens.So, yeah, um, okay. Happy to send that to you. I'm sorry, what was that? I'm happy to send that to you. I'll get that over to you. Why, why would you say that? Because you seem to not remember how you voted on that item. You seem to not remember. I'm going to get on with my report. It's been a busy time of year, and over the past few weeks, I had the privilege of attending many events. I want to highlight three in particular. First, I attended the Joint Forces Foundation Annual Community Ball Hockey Tournament, held in honor of fallen constable Rick O'Brien. This tournament is more than just a sports event. It is a powerful initiative focused on building positive relationships between youth and first responders. The Joint Forces Foundation's mission is to foster understanding, trust, and collaboration through inclusive programs, activities, and events, and this tournament truly brings that mission to life. Constable O'Brien was a resident of our community who paid the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty. He had a deep commitment to youth and community, and this annual tournament reflects that spirit while honoring his memory. It was inspiring to see youth, families, and first responders come together in such a positive and respectful environment. Secondly, I attended the Langley Care Foundation Pub Night this past weekend. This well-supported event brought community members together for an enjoyable evening while raising funds. Uh, proceeds from the event go toward enhancing the quality of life for seniors living at Langley Lodge. It was wonderful, uh, to see the support for initiatives that directly benefit our seniors and help to ensure they receive the care and enrichment they deserve. Third and final, in my role as a Rotarian in Langley, I have the distinct pleasure of serving on the SASI Awards Committee, a bursary program recognizing exceptional youth living in Langley or attending school here. This past week, 20 youth were honored for their unique contributions demonstrating service above self, Rotary's guiding motto and value, and for enhancing the lives of those around them. I want to thank the mayor and all of council for supporting funding towards that event, and also to our staff for providing contents for the swag bags with TOL branding. It gave me great joy to hear their stories at this grassroots event. Many of these young people are making a meaningful difference often in the face of adversity. Their compassion, leadership, and resilience give me great hope for the next generation. Yeah. Council Pratt. Yeah. Thank you, Your Worship. I want to just, uh, give a special shout-out to the organizers and to staff for a fantastic 104th May Day. It was a lot of fun to be able to walk in that. And I also wanted to give a shout-out to the organizers of the Aldergrove Community Market for the great opening weekend there in Aldergrove. It was very, very well attended. It was probably the perfect weather day and a huge success, and obviously just something great to have out in the Aldergrove community. Councilor Whitmar. Yeah. Uh, certainly want to, uh, thank staff for the great efforts on the May Day Parade and the May Day weekend, a tremendous, uh, weekend. Uh, always a lot of people come out to that event. So that was great. Um, and certainly the Aldergrove Market as well. And, uh, uh, just after the last council meeting, um, along with some other cou- members of council, was able to attend the Fibromyalgia Wellspring Foundation event. Uh, that was a tremendous event. Uh, the stories that they tell are very touching. Um, and so it was really great to be able to support that, uh, at that night with, uh, other members of council, uh, that were there. Thank you. Councilor Bailey. Yeah. I had busy time also, at the fibromyalgia event and, uh, and also, uh, at the May Day, uh, parade. It's always, uh, pretty cool to get out there and, and that kind of stuff. And the, uh, main event, uh, the, uh... just, uh, the other day, uh, supporting the, um, the school board, uh, at the Equestrian Center was, uh, a very nice event. Uh, beautiful and it's great when you get to see the equestrians actually, uh, going at the same time. Uh, the Rapid Relief Team put on a wonderful, uh, uh, feeding for the people that are staffing the hospital and the first responders. Uh, they were there last year and again this year, and really thank them for, uh, helping the people that, uh, help us. Uh, I attended a, um, an E-Comm meeting, which is, uh... I'm on the transition team, uh, transitioning into NG911, uh, which has its challenges. And, uh, and the last one is, uh, the State of the Township, uh, uh, was a, a well-attended event, and, um, I quite enjoyed, uh, (laughs) being on the run for the last two weeks here. Councilor Koontz. Um, (clears throat) yeah. Similar to many of the other folks here, um, I attended the May Day Parade, and I think, um, there was a really, um, welcomed, uh, change. I think they did a... uh, they didn't go around, um, the corner, uh, by the, the fire... Or not the fire hall. (laughs) Mavis and Glover. Thank you. Thank you. Mavis and Glover. Uh, initially, I thought, "Ooh, that's gonna be a miss," but I think it actually went really well. So I don't know how everybody else feels, but it seemed... I know for a family that were, uh, attending that, that the flow of the, the parade was, was a little bit better. Uh, so, um, that was a good change. Um, I did go to the fibromyalgia, uh, dinner, and it was really great to, um, to be there and just to support, uh, the wonderful folks there, um, that are doing the work there at, uh, their thrift shop out in Aldergrove. So, um, so that was really fun. And the Aldergrove Community Market, uh, wow, what a, what a great, uh, event that was. Really fun to be there and, and, uh, just to see all the, um, the vendors, and, uh, definitely will be attending again.All right. Councilor Ferguson? Yes. We've had a busy, busy, busy May here, and, uh, yes, I attended the May Day Parade, and thank you to the Fort Langley Lions. And, uh, the weather was good, and, um, the breakfast, they always have a breakfast every morning, and that was great too. And, uh, I also attended the Aldergrove Community Market, and that was a exciting thing. And, um, I bought a lawnmower off (laughs) Home Hardware that day. They, they had a special, so, uh, contributing to, uh, uh, Langley Aldergrove business. And, uh, again, I, um, uh, participated in attending the main event, uh, that, uh, Councilor Bailey mentioned, and that's put on by the Langley, uh, School District Foundation. It was held at, uh, Thunderbird, and, um, I, I think it's great that they... Me being a teacher, uh, they put, uh, special funds towards special needs and, uh, and challenges among young, young people that are students. And, um, what else? Oh, uh, yes, I was at the, uh, Fort... The five row Cheryl and, uh, Nigel Tom, and I said to them, "Oh, by the way, how long have you been doing this?" "Several years." And I said, "Well, h- how many year-" "Well, you were there 'cause you helped us get started." So, uh, they've done an awful lot of work, and, uh, I've been to two or three of their thrift stores over the years. They keep changing location. And they will be moving into a new building at, uh, 272nd and Fraser Highway. So they're excited about that, and I, I think that the public should be as well. And, um, the... Again, as Councilor Bailey had mentioned, the Rapid Relief Team put on an excellent, um, uh, luncheon or bar- barbecue or whatever for the members of the... Our hospital, and it was a great event. And it's, uh, a, a good organization because they do support people that, uh, uh, first responders and, and the like. And it was excellent. And their burgers were just fantastic. They did a great job. Uh, I also, um, on Ecalm, but I support Metro Vancouver, and they've got a lot of challenges going on, and, um, an awful lot to learn from. The State of the Township of Langley, again, was excellent, and Mr. Mayor, you did a good job as possible. You could have added a few more things, but, uh, you would have needed another hour. But, uh, it was well-received. Um, the donation food was very good and, um, great. And the last thing... Okay, well, there's probably more, but I'm not gonna mention, is I have given everybody the home opener, uh, bill. And this is good for wiping off your computer and wiping your glasses. And it, it's a, it's a great thing, and I also felt that it was Friday, May the 22nd, the Bandits did win. And again, I'm gonna say I never thought, and I never thought that we would have professional basketball at the Langley Event Center in Langley, and I never thought we'd have, uh, what were they called? The Vancouver Giants, uh, as well. So these are all things that are happening. And now we've got a new rink coming up, as well as a fore- foreface as well. Who knows what that's gonna include as well. We already know, to begin with, ice sheets and, and floor space, but in the future, who knows? That's my report. It's exciting. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah. Thank you. Councilor Bailey? Yeah. And I'll finish off with, uh, the council, everyone talks about the basketball opener. It was the season opener on Wednesday of the Langley Thunder Senior A. So let's not forget, uh, we have some of the best ball players in the world. Some of them are playing in the pro teams in the NL, and, uh, get out and, and watch, uh, a lot of the local products that, uh, are playing for the Langley Thunder. Uh, if I can switch into metro? Yeah, sure. Go ahead. Sure. Uh, on the Water, uh, Committee, on June the 1st, Stage 3 water restrictions coming into effect. These are, are, uh, proactive, uh, same as they went to Stage 2 early, uh, because of the snow pack right now in the immediate area is 44%, uh, of normal. So, uh, they're moving this ahead, uh, just to get, uh, uh, ahead of the anticipated draw. I would, uh, urge everyone to make sure that they know what the restrictions at Stage 3 are. They're significant. And, uh, one of the great things about being on the Water Committee is you find out what they're doing for the future too. Uh, they're punching the Annacis, uh, uh, Tunnel through its, uh, the... All the preparatory work is gone. This is gonna be a 2.6 meter, uh, water pipe that's coming in. And the great thing is, is seeing the seismic resi- uh, resiliency that they're building into all of these water structures. Uh, and, and sometimes what they're doing is they're building a tube, tubes within a tube, and they're down to, a lot of times they're down 60 meters, uh, 30 meters underneath the, the, uh, river base. So our water supply coming from, uh, from, uh, metro is, uh, some of the highest standards in the world. Thank you. Anybody wish to make a Metro Vancouver report? Uh, yeah. There was, uh, I've been to many of those events that were referenced. Appreciate that. Won't re-list them all. And I did spend a fair bit of time preparing for the State of the Township, and I appreciated, uh, everybody who, uh, was able to make it. And, you know, it's, it's interesting. It was, uh, good factual conversation, and I appreciated it. And, uh, of course, uh, viewpoints and perspectives, all, all valuable in and of themselves. And, you know, and one of the themes that we continue, I think we'll need to continue to explore is, uh, facts. And that, uh, you know, we are seeing a lot of attempts, I believe, in the community to talk about things other than facts, or make up different facts. And so, you know, and one of them is our voting records. And so on July 24th, 2023, there was a notice of motion, Town of Langley Housing Authority for non-market housing, and that was carried with Councilor Martin's, Councilor Richter opposed. And I get a little touchy around the housing trust because I think it's such a great initiative, and you can't have it if you don't vote to create it.And so, you know, and we are seeing the benefits of three projects, you know, coming through, uh, from BC Housing and the BC Bills Program and how quickly this Council acted. So again, to see it maligned in this way online, especially, is, is, is definitely frustrating as a, a person that, uh, believes very strongly in it, and we spoke about that a lot on Thursday, that we'll continue to, uh, to see facts. We're gonna move on to items M1 through 7. Is there any questions or discussion on M1 through 7? Councilor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah. Thank you, Your Worship. I, I want to thank staff for the updated interim housing target report, uh, where it talks about the 6,765 units across the township, broken down by each community that, uh, have been granted third reading and therefore are considered approved in principle as of March 31, 2026. And I just wanted to, through you, uh, to staff, for these 6,700 units of housing, uh, whether they're towers on 200th Street or townhomes and condos in Brookswood, uh, based on when the ACC bylaw was adopted, do any of these 6,605 units have to pay ACCs? Through your Worship to Councilor Pratt, to our knowledge, s- uh, since this is March 31, 2026, and I believe the ACC bylaw received final adoption, that logistically speaking none of them would have to pay, uh, ACC, there'd be in-stream protection. So, s- uh, I appreciate that last, um, comment about in-stream protection. So 60... Almost 6,800 units of housing across the township have in-stream protection against ACCs, so there would be no policy in place in order to, uh, receive any type of amenity contribution except for the interim policy regarding CACs. Is that correct? Th- that would be the policy applicable. Thank you. And, of course, Council would need to maintain that policy. Is that correct, Mr. Kunert? Uh, correct, since it's a policy. Not a- not vote against adopting it. That's correct. Yeah. Councilor Martins? Yeah. Thank you. Um, I just wanted to talk about M1, uh, closed captioning at Council Advisory Committee meetings. I did notice that at my last, um, Heritage Advisory, uh, Committee meeting. I saw the closed captioning on, um, and I'm just wondering, 'cause I am able, able-bodied, um, uh, and so it's not for m- for my needs, but I, I am mindful of, um, people in our community and on our committees who do rely on that technology, is it possible that, uh, we do a check-in with each advisory committee, uh, to in- just ask them at the table if we could just make it a standing item in the next four, four or five meetings? I think accessibility is also meeting in June. Um, just to check, check in with them if it's, um, you know, reasonable and working for them, or if we do need to consider an expense. Uh, through your Worship to Councilor Martins, uh, uh, staff can definitely look at that, but I believe the intent of this item was once we did closed captionings we have to review it at the, uh, at the meeting that was, it was implemented at, and to ensure that there was no issues and that committee members were satisfied, uh, with the current closed captionings. Councilor Whitmarsh? Yes. Thank you. Uh, my question is around, um, back to M2, through your worship to staff. Um, (clears throat) I, I also wanted to talk about the 6,765 units that have received third reading. Um, is that, is that the, um, entirety of units that have received third reading, uh, over the... Like, that are sitting in, at the township today with third reading and that have not progressed beyond third reading, but have third reading, and so that could have taken place in the last five years or 10 years, or wh- what's the time period that these have come? Do- through your worship to Councilor Whitmarsh, um, this would be the current, uh, approved in-principle units, so some of them could be dating back several years, but there is also, um... I wouldn't t- I would have to check with staff, but I t- uh, more than five years would be some of them with their conditional approvals would lapse 'cause they would need to renew it as well, 'cause, uh, the, uh, there's a two-year period. Um, so, but majority of them would be in the, in, in the recent couple years. Okay. So, sorry, did you s- did you say they lapse after five years, or is there a period in which third readings lapse? Uh, through your worship to Councilor Whitmarsh, it would... The development permits would... It's two-year renewals, uh, on the development permits, and re-zonings, we... Re-zonings do stand, so some of them do date back several years. Um, I don't believe there's a specific timeline to it. I would just refer to Mr. Richardson on that. Uh, through your Worship, to supplement, uh, Minister De Kuner's comments, so, um, development permit laps in a two-year period. Of the re-zonings, use... Council will note that sometimes when it takes more than a 12-month period pursuant to council direction, uh, we put a clerks note on there saying that, um, this was presented to council, and the public hearing has been more than 12 months, and we provide some additional clarification information for council's consideration in those. Okay. That's helpful. Um, I guess I was wondering if there's a process that we have when, um, when applications that have third reading, when they're getting, uh, close to a, to either expiring or, uh, or they're... it's taking a long time to move forward, if there's a process where we check in with them to find out what are, what are the-... reasons why they're taking longer than, uh, we might expect, or longer than normal or getting to that expiry. Is it, you know, is it financial? Is it for policies? Is it they've changed their mind? Um, do we have a process of sort of checking in with applicants that are taking, um, extra long to move from third to fourth reading? Uh, Dear Worship to Councilor Whitmarsh, we do review the bylaws, I believe annually. I, and, uh, Leg- Legislative Services does check with Community Development. If there is, um, no progress or, um, the applicant has chosen a different direction, then I, I believe now we do have a, a practice where we, uh, bring forward bylaws to abandon. I believe that's the correct terminology. Then the bylaws would be abandoned. So that, that does provide, uh, let's just say a check and balances and a safety mechanism to ensure that, uh, the, uh, bylaws related to these rezoning applications are annually, uh, reviewed at least, or checked in to see if they're progressing. (clears throat) Right, okay. Um, that, that's helpful as well. I, I notice that at the bottom of the, um, uh, the re- the, uh, in the report at the bottom of the first table, there's a little, uh, bullet. Um, this is where there was 1,001 new units, and then the little bullet says that, "The number of net new units is less in this memorandum than that of the report due to applications being adjusted." What, what does that mean, "being adjusted"? Like they, they withdrew them, or, um, they didn't pass third reading, or what does that mean by "being adjusted"? Yeah, through your Worship to Councilor Whitmarsh, yes, th- it was withdrawn. So, and so withdrawn, so they would have to if, for that property, they'd have to reapply if they were going to, uh, do something on a particular property. Okay, that is correct. Okay, thank you. Councilor Koest? Yeah, just a couple ones. Um, so the closed captioning, um, is it possible, maybe it's just a suggestion, that, um, instead of the closed captioning being on the big screen in the Salmon River Room or wherever we are that the person, or maybe multiple individuals have a, have an iPad that they're able to sort of read the closed captioning on? Because, um, it, it's just a suggestion. Um, I just know that for the person that has to go and turn around and read off of the big screen that it, it kinda takes away from maybe, uh, their experience in the meeting. If they could just have a, like a, look down at an iPad it might be just a, a little bit more of a, a better experience for, uh, for that. Uh, so that's one. Um, and four, so accessibility. I recall last year at the Seniors' Fair in Aldergrove that our staff had to field questions from some outspoken seniors (laughs) as to why there were no paper copies of the survey. Uh, many seniors are not comfortable with digital surveys and still prefer, uh, putting pen to paper. So I, I'm just curious and I hope that with this new accessibility plan that old-fashioned methods of collecting data will still be included, as that might still be the most important information gathered considering the barriers some of us have, uh, to the digital world, and the digital world that we live in. So it's just, um, something I wanted to raise. Um, through your Worship to Councilor Koest, we'll continue reviewing that item. I believe, uh, we, we do, uh, take, uh, when it comes to certain, um, events, uh, open houses, the, we do try to accommodate to the best of our ability, uh, to ensure that there's, uh, any, uh, there's further accessibilities, including to seniors or, uh, people that are, may not, uh, be adaptable to some of the, uh, new, uh, measures we're using. Okay, thank you. Councilor Ferguson? Oh, yeah, when the manager's up here I was just wondering if he could answer. We as a Seniors Committee, we were actually putting together, it's in the process of, of being in the draft form, a, um, a questionnaire. And I think one of those things came up regarding, uh, if I may through the chair to Aubrey Yes, through the chair to Councilor Ferguson, that is something that has been discussed by staff of we've, as we've developed a draft accessibility plan. So, um, the intent would be to be accessible would be to have paper copies, uh, to make those available upon request. So yeah, and, and it's a good thing that, uh, you know, that, uh, Councilor Koest brought it up, because we are do- actually doing that. So it's really good. So staff's on top of it, council's talking about it, and it's a positive thing moving forward. Thank you, Aubrey. Councilor Biley Yeah, I can supply some information from the Recreation, Culture and Parks Advisory Committee. We're really glad, uh, to see the, the closed captioning. Uh, the person who, who raised that, uh, has, has, uh, a hearing impairment, is on that committee, and, and when it popped up, uh, when the closed captioning popped up, uh, her and, uh, a few others, myself included, who, who, uh, too many sirens in my ears for, for, um, many years, uh, I love this. Closed captioning at, uh, at the council meetings and especially in those, those, uh, advisory committees. So yeah, the, the RCPAC, uh, loves closed captioning. (laughs) I can tell you that right now. All right, seeing no other discussion, I'll move on to item N1. Does anybody wish to move that? Moved by Councilor Rentz. I'll second. Second by Councilor Pratt. Is there any discussions or discussion on N1? Councilor Koest. Oh, yeah. So, um, you know, I'd like to thank Rosemary Jenbrick. She's the one who brought that forward, and as a, uh, somebody who takes care of the Murrayville Cemetery, um, she highlighted the fact that, uh, that cenotaph really needed, uh, the same, uh, treatment as the Fort Langley one, so...Happy to support this. Council Martins? Yeah, um, I'm- I'm trying to recall when we had a report from staff, um, about the cenotaph at Fort Langley. Um, was there any review done by staff on this one as well, and its, um, status? Uh, through your worship, Councilor Martins, I- I believe that report did include the condition on the Murrayvale Cenotaph, and- and currently, we- I did check with staff. The- the condition is, uh, it's in good condition at the moment. Sorry, did you say it's in good condition? There's no cracks? Uh, it's in good condition at the moment. They- I believe the base was already rehabilitated as well, and I'll just re- defer to Mr. Rule to provide any other updates on that specific cenotaph. Yeah, through your worship, the cenotaph was restored back in 2017, and that was so there was a focus on the concrete base and stairs at that time. Uh, staff, while looking at the Fort Langley cenotaph, also looked at the Murrayvale Cenotaph and noted as in good condition. Okay, great. So, um, I- I- I'm supposing, um, this request then is, uh, strictly, um, preventative, um, I- I'm assuming. So, uh, and I'm okay with that unless, um, staff, um, feel that this would not be a good idea, um, because it is in good condition. Um, I'd just appreciate a little bit more information since it's already been reviewed by staff. Through your worship, Council Martins, I believe it was from the committee, so we would have to kind of see what the intent of that committee was and what they are- are requiring. Uh. Sorry, I- I- if I can, uh, just to redirect on that. Um, what- what I'm wondering is if applying sealant would actually, um, be a bad thing, um, as opposed to being a good thing and being preventative. Um, and I'm- because staff have already assessed it, I just thought, um, maybe staff could speak to that. Well, has- has the committee already endorsed that though, with this motion? They've already- they've already endorsed sealants. Yes, and so I'm asking our staff if that i- i- the- what the impact of sealing it. Um, when it comes to cenotaphs, uh, I believe we use contractors and we'd have to check with our contractors just 'cause it's specialized work, but I'll just defer, again, to Mr. Rule on that. Okay, through your worship, I would agree with that recommendation. We should check with our contractor and the manufacturer specifications of the material used. Okay. So, um, since this is a- a motion that's come forward from a committee, um, is it procedurally correct that we refer this to staff for follow-up with a contractor? Hm, maybe here I'll just probably take care of that. I don't think we would refer it to a contractor, but- No, refer to staff. Let me just remove something and see if it meets with your objective. So I'm gonna move that N1 be referred to staff for an item for information, um, reviewing their request from the committee that it be sealed and monitored for further damage, and whether or not in the same matter as the Fort Langley cenotaph is applicable and appropriate. Is there a seconder to that? Seconded by Councilor Pratt. Does anybody wish to discuss that? Nope, seeing none. I'll call a question on that referral of N1. That carries unanimously, and move on to item O1, finishing Moore of 80th Avenue. I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Renn. Any discussion on O1? Seeing none, call the question on O1. Carries unanimously. Councilor Ferguson. Okay, I have a, uh, note. I could add an amendment either now or- or later on. Just to move it as amended? Uh, I'd like to make an amendment, yes. What would you like to- I would say, oh, at, uh, the very first, um, paragraph after and, that the intersection of 28th and 200ths be studied as well. Say that again? Say that again, please. Pardon me? What was that? That the intersection of 28th and 200ths be studied as well. To be considered? Yeah. Okay. That would be considered. That- that's actually a better word. Considered. As well. Okay. Okay. So just move that as amended? I'd like to move the motion as amended. Sorry. Do you have that? So go ahead, Councilor Ferguson. Wait a second. Uh, just the mo- motion speaks for itself. Thank you very much. Any other discussion on... Any other discussion on O1 as amended? Councilor Whitmers. (clears throat) Yeah, I certainly, uh, I support this, uh, uh, getting report from staff to, uh, look into this. The- that intersection at 28th and 204, um, is, uh, kind of an awkward intersection, and, um, often vehicles aren't sure which one's stopping and which one's not, and cars are running through it. So I think it is important to take a look at it, um, and I'm fine with us including 200th Street. Um, I'm not really wanting to see a lot of lights added on 200th Street, so, um, but this is a report, and this is to get some information on how to make those intersections safer, so I'll certainly support it. Seeing no other discussion, I'll call the question on O2 as amended.That carries unanimously. Uh, is there any other business? No? Can I get a motion, anybody have any items for closed? Councilor Martins? Yeah. I'd like to add an item under labor relations. Okay. Anyone else? Get a motion to resolve into close as amended. Oh, moved by Councilor Widmar, second by Councilor Pratt. Those in favor? Opposed? And that's carried. Get a motion to terminate. Moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Bailey. All those in favor? Opposed? And that's carried. Thank you. (pause)