All right, good afternoon, everyone. We'll get going here with our regular meeting of Township Council. We'll call that to order for Monday, July 27th. And 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, Kwantlen, Matsqui, and Semiahmoo First Nations. Can I get a motion to just adopt A.1 and A.2 as a single motion? I'll move that, seconded by Councilor Rint. Any discussion on A.1 and A.2? Seeing none, call the question. That carries unanimously. Can I get a motion to adopt the meeting minutes of July 13th? Moved by Councilor Ferguson, seconded by Councilor Rint. Call the question on B.1.Okay. Need Councilor [laughs] okay. Perfect. Thank you. Um, good afternoon, mayor and council, and thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Angel Elias, and I'm the executive director of the Langley Division of Family Practice, and with me today I have the... my director of finance, Mr. Cole Bailey. Um, I'd like to give you a brief overview of who we are, uh, the work we're doing to improve access to primary care in Langley, and how we believe partnering with the township is essential as our community continues to grow. Um, who we are. So the Langley Division of Family Practice is a physician-led nonprofit organization, uh, representing family physicians throughout Langley. Our role is to bring physicians together to, uh, address common healthcare priorities while working collaboratively with Fraser Health, the Ministry of Health, community organizations, and municipal partners. Ultimately, our goal is in to, uh, improve in-patient care, um, strengthen primary care services, and ensure physicians have meaningful voice in healthcare planning and decision-making. So today, our network includes more than 200 community care providers working across 45 primary care clinics. We also work closely with 17 nurse practitioners, more than 80 medical office assistants in the primary care network, which is our PCN allied health team. One of the division's greatest strengths is our ability to connect these providers by creating opportunities for collaboration, education, and shared problem-solving. We're helping, um, build a stronger and more coordinated health system for our community. All right, let's get into some data. So this is our current attachment demand, and one of the biggest healthcare challenges we face is ensuring that every resident has access to a family physician. Although thousands of residents are attached, uh, demand continues to grow as our population increases. And so the data on this slide highlights the current attachment success we've had in Langley to date. I know it's a busy slide, and I only got five minutes, so I won't go into it, but I'm happy to, um, connect with anybody, um, for more details. So future population growth. Um, so looking ahead, Langley, as you all are aware, are one of the fastest-growing communities in British Columbia. And so population growth means increased demand for physicians, clinics, allied health professionals, and community health services. So without proactive planning today, the gap between healthcare capacity and community need will continue to widen. This makes recruitment, retention, and infrastructure planning more important than ever. So recruiting family physicians isn't simply about finding doctors. It's also about ensuring they have places to practice. And so this slide illustrates the physicians we've recruited and where they are currently practicing throughout Langley. And so the pink bubbles are current clinics, and the blue bubbles are where new clinics need to be developed. And so our division works closely with new physicians, residents, and community partners to help connect physicians with practices and supports, and support them as they establish themselves in the community. So however, recruitment alone isn't enough. We also need clinic space, sustainable practice models, and supportive municipal planning to ensure these physicians can continue serving Langley residents. So by the data shown here, we need a total of 69 new physicians to support the township's primary care needs by 2041. So 31 physicians will be needed to meet the demand from growth, and 38 new physicians, um, need to cover retiring physicians in the community. We're pleased, um, to say that right now we have currently 33 new family physicians accepting patients across 13 clinics, um, in Langley and Aldergrove. However, the ministry data estimates that we have approximately 20,000 residents who still remain unattached to a primary care provider. And so since creating this slide, we've attached even more, making our list go from 2,400 down to 900 people currently waiting to be attached to a provider in Langley. This highlights the importance of encouraging residents who need a family physician to register through the Health Connect registry. The more accurate our registered numbers are, the better we can plan future physician recruitment and connect patients with available providers. So how can the township support primary care? So as Langley continues to grow, healthcare planning needs to grow alongside it. We see several opportunities where township can make a significant impact. So considering healthcare needs during community growth and development planning, streamlining zoning, permitting, and developing processes for medical clinics, include dedicated medical hubs or healthcare spaces within future OCPs, continue to partner with the division to strategically recruit physicians and expand access to primary care. Strong partnerships between municipalities and healthcare organizations will help ensure residents continue receiving the healthcare that they need close to home. I wanna thank you for your time today. Um, uh, we appreciate the opportunity to share the work of the Langley Division of Family Practice. Um, and I'm happy to take any questions that you may have. Yeah, thanks very much for the presentation. Really appreciate it. Uh, I was wondering if we could go back to the slide briefly where you were showing the, the bubbles representing where we would have future anticipated demand. Uh, some of them are, uh, in areas that make complete sense. Willoughby obviously right in the kind of commercial areas. Walnut Grove. Uh, Murrayville, g- glad to see as well. Brookswood. I'm curious, Fort Langley, and then, uh, there's a kinda blue bubble there on what would be a b- I'm assuming 232nd east of Murrayville there. Uh, one up in Walnut Grove kind of outside of a commercial area. So I'm wondering just the methodology that went into sort of selecting the areas, or if it's more generally speaking, in this neighborhood we anticipate needing more. So it's, it's a general guesstimation on the methodology in regards to this based on growth and based on population of growth and where that population is gonna be. And so it's really not perfect science, absolutely. And so we just kind of looked at where the hot spots of Langley and the growth is based on the projection of the data that we were able to collect. Um, and then just kind of looked at, well, you're gonna need to have physicians to cover that growth in those areas. Right. And new physicians, 'cause a lot of the current clinics, yes, we have 33 new doctors taking on physicians, but once their patient panels are full, their patient panels are full. And so as that growth comes in, you need to be able to meet that demand as well. But it's not perfect science, so you have to be able to pivot and change. So if another, uh, area of Langley is growing faster, then okay, then as you're looking at those approvals for those developments, where's the physicians, doctors' offices, and where is those medical hubs gonna go? Right. Awesome. Appreciate that. Yeah. Yeah, I just wanna say I think it's a brilliant idea to have medical hubs i- in our NC, like in our neighborhood plans in our OCP. It makes perfect sense to me. We should've done it a long time ago, and thank you for putting it back on the radar. Question for you: the physicians that are retiring, are they selling their practices or just shutting the doors and leaving? No, that's not the way that it usually works. So when a physician retires, if you have several different physicians that are actually, um, in a clinic together, and when a physician chooses to retire, we start working with them well ahead of the game- Okay ... um, to make sure that we recruit to be able to, um, um, have their patient panel transfer over to a new physician. The reality is though is the older physicians that have been here for 30, 40 years have patient panels of over 3,000 patients, and that's no longer today. So, so those physicians you need to recruit, you know, two to three more, um, physicians to cover that. Um, the great thing about Langley is Langley's very attractive for physicians, so we've been very successful with our recruitment. Um, but it's space. We don't have the space to be able to put all the physicians that wanna come to Langley and join Langley. It's kind of a good problem to have, but [laughs] it's kinda not because, um, if we can't give them, um, viable space, um, as well as people registering in the HDR system for them to be able to have their patient panel, um, then they will go into other communities. Which isn't a bad thing. All communities need physicians. But we wanna make sure that Langley has what they need as well. Yeah. No, that's excellent. Yeah. It's a great idea. And it'll be, it's important to note that most municipalities now are also starting to look at that health hub, um, ideal as well in their OCP planning. Yep. Well, I'm glad to hear it. I'm certainly 100% behind that idea, so thank you for coming today and raising it. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, I got a couple questions. Um, so we talk about clinics, and then we also talk, talk about maybe private practice, right? So would, would this be specifically clinics or, um... 'Cause what I'm thinking is that, um, some of the clinics that I know have doctors who will take patients, but they don't actually have their own, you know, um, space, [laughs] like you said. Yeah, so all clinics, there's 45 clinics in Langley, and they're actually all private practices. Okay. And so you'll have one medical director that opens up an, um, the actual space, and then we'll recruit physicians to join- Mm-hmm ... um, that clinic, um, with them. And of course those physicians that join that clinic have their own patient panel, um, and they are free to, you know, if it doesn't work out at that clinic, to join another clinic. But all clinics are private practice. Okay. So, so we're not talking about, like, the family doctor with his own space. We're talking about the bigger, the bigger clinic. All 45 clinics are f- private family- Okay ... are they're family doctors. Okay. Um- So even if it, you have a walk-in clinic that- Yeah ... we have a couple of physicians that are doing walk-ins, those are still all private practices. Okay. Awesome. Um, the other question I had was, um, 33, you said the number 33. Yeah. Is that, is that a good number? Are we, like, still needing way more? Or, or and what are other communities seeing? Are they seeing the same, um- So Langley's actually in a really, really strong position right now with our recruitment over the last year and a half has been extremely strong. We've recruited quite a few f- new physicians from the UK as well as the US 'cause they've made it a little bit easier for, um, international, um- Oh, okay ... um, physicians to, to join Canada. Um, BC specifically. So Langley's been very attractive 'cause we have a lot to offer because we do have our hospital, and we do have specialists, and we do have maternity. Also, we have our long-term care. Family physicians are part of all those networks as well and provide those services, and that's attractive where some communities may not have as many networks. Um, as well as various different things. Some physicians come out here because they love Langley and everything that Langley has to offer. And so, um, it's attractive to move to Langley. Good schools and, um, you know, you can have a little bit of everything, right? Yeah. So it's a, it's a little bit of, um- We've done really good with recruiting. Now, we need to get everybody in Langley to register, um, onto the HCR system so that we can match them with a doctor, and that's been a, our, th- that is our pain point right now. Okay. Um, so we are actively out in the community trying to get people to register, and then the people that move into Langley, they had their doctor, say, if they're moving in from Burnaby, they have their doctor and they're still traveling to Burnaby. So it's now trying to say, "You don't have to no longer travel to Burnaby. We can support you here." Okay, one last question. I read- read recently that, um, one out of every 10 emergency room doctors are just calling it quits, 'cause they just can't deal with all of the, the pressure of, um, the emergency room. Will this help? Wou- would this help the, the emergency room? Because it just feels like some people don't have a doctor and they head, head over to the emergency room. Yeah. So emergency physicians are managed and recruited by Fraser Health. Mm-hmm. And so our, um... What's unique to Langley, and onl- the only other community that has this program is Chilliwack, is we have our in-patient program. So we have, um, 30 family physicians that actually will see their patients into the hospital. They work with the ER as well as the hospitalist. And so, say, if you're, you get admitted into the ER and the ER knows that you have a family doctor, they're, that family doctor's gonna get called and will come and, and, and care for you while you're in the hospital. However, that's not recruitment for the ER. Fraser Health has to, um, take care of that. But we do work in partnership with Fraser Health partners. Um, and we also promote to physicians as well when we're recruiting, um, all the opportunities. So that doesn't just include ER, but, uh, also includes the UPCC. Okay, I've got more questions, but I'll just leave it to the rest of my council colleagues. Um- Okay ... thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Lee. Angel, thank you for coming today. We've had you, or who, some of your team, I remember Barb Shack coming forward to our seniors committee and other committees over the years, talking about what you're doing with Division of Family Practices. I did wanna say that, uh, used to hand out those business cards, and we've handed quite a few of those out, both from our committees and also from my, uh, son-in-law. He's got a PhD i- in medical administration. I've handed them out to him as well, and he said the response has been very good because Langley being a livable community with schools and- Yeah ... and other resources. So s- just the hospital itself, as you're aware, you know, we need expansion there. Yes. Um, how could, does your group help out with that particular challenge? So it's not that we can necessarily help Fraser Health with their challenge for recruitment, but what we do do is work with them to be able to, uh, work with our ministry depa- um, Ministry of Health in regards to the, the needs. And as physicians, they always say to the Ministry of Health, "You know, we need to support, we need more hospitalists, and we need ERs, um, physicians as well." But that is really the umbrella of, of your Fraser Health partners. Um, we are in close contact with Fraser Health. We meet with them on a regular basis with the executive di- I meet personally with the executive director. We have our PCN Allied Health team that's also supports Fraser Health, whether it be at UPCC or, um, t- bringing in our pharmacists to try to do, um... Mm-hmm ... when you, uh, leave the hospital, to make sure that you have your proper medication. Um, but yes, recruitment for Fraser Health is definitely a challenge. But again, we make sure that any physician that's coming in, we give them the options to, to work at UPCC, work at the ER. We even did a video, a recruitment video in partnership, um, with Fraser Health to be able to highlight, um, everything that Langley has to offer, and as h- as well as the division. The division, um, also, what's unique to Langley is the division is starting to support our hospitalists and our ER physicians. We're doing an actual hospitalist and ER physician support event in November, um, which most divisions don't necessarily do something like that. But we're doing that to, you know, try to help create that balance, that work-life balance and that healthy balance, and th- they don't necessarily get that type of support from the health authority, 'cause they don't have the means to be able to do that, but we do. So we're, we're definitely supporting those physicians as well, which will make it more attractive for new physicians, knowing that, "You know what, they're not just placed there and on their own." But Fraser Health needs to come to the table as well, absolutely, and, and needs to... But I'm gonna say Langley's, as, I know that there's struggles, but Langley is doing much better than other communities. The ER has not been closed. Mm. So, um, other communities, um, the ER has been closed on a regular basis. So we really appreciate what, what you're doing. And the last thing with some of the committees I'm at, some of the people that w- that say they have got doctors now, and the list, I'm not sure if it's expanding or you've a- able to do something, but, uh, the response has been very positive. Um, so yes, uh, we're happy to, um, uh, provide a list of physicians that are accepting. I believe it's all on our website as well. So, um, and, um, yes, we can, if you connect with us and you need a family physician, we'll get you connected with a family physician within a day. Thank you, everybody. We appreciate what you do. Thank you. Yes, I see you're including, uh, nurse practitioners in there as well. Yeah. Thank you. They're a, they're, they're a segment that is often overlooked. How, that number 17, how does that look compared to where you would like-That number to look Well, we would like that number to go up. Langley was the first community to actually accept nurse practitioners into the community. We actually even have one on our board of directors, and we were the first out of all of the communities. And so we kind of, um, you know, opened up the, the, the doors in regards to that. Our problem is, is our nurse practitioners are based under our PCN contracts, um, which the ministry holds. And so Langley's, um... we've met, uh, all that we can do in regards to nurse practitioners, um, being in clinic for primary care, which is very frustrating on our behalf. Um, however, um, we still have opportunity for our nurse practitioners to join our UPCC as well as the hospital. And so we, um, s- will still support those, uh, nurse practitioners, whether they're in, uh, Fraser Health contract or one of our PCN contracts. Um, and we support them through educational, um, opportunities. Um, uh, we do quarterly meetings, I believe, with the nurse practitioners. We just had one where we actually to talk with them about their pain points and how can we support them through that. And I would love, uh, to have more in our clinics, but unfortunately the ministry has, um, said that Langley does- isn't eligible for any more because of our low attachment numbers. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. And thank you for being here today and, um, appreciate your presentation. Um, couple questions for you, uh, just, uh, uh, for my interest sake. Um, you mentioned that, um, historically the, uh, family doctors have had about 3,000 patient panels, I think you called it? The older physicians- Yeah ... um, that have been here for 40-plus years, yes, they have quite large patient panels. What would be a reasonable patient panel in, in today's- So today the a- average physician has about 1,200 patients per panel. Sometimes it depends how complex their patient panel is. And you gotta also understand, um, the more complex their patient panel is, the more needs that, that they need to give those patients. And so, um, but 1,200 is the, the average. Some will go up to 15, some will go up to 17, 'cause physicians don't like to say no. Um, so yeah, it's, it's- Okay ... definitely varied, that's for sure. Yeah. Um, and then out of curiosity, the, the Health Link, um- Yes ... the, the ability to sign up for this, um, how long has this been in place? So, oh, um, that's a good question. So the Ministry of Health, uh, has started this, I believe it was two years ago, Cole. So two years ago they changed their metrics in regards to attachment, and one of their main mandates was attachment to physicians. So they created the HCR, we call it HCR for the acronyms. Um, and they encouraged everybody to register through there, and then we get that list. And then as physicians are asking for more patient panels, we provide them the list based on matching them to a physician that matches their needs, and then that physician will, um, attach that patient. So without the patients in that pa- uh, in that HCR, um, we can't attach. And so please, if you don't have a family physician, [laughs] um, please register. Mm. And it's fairly, it's very easy. Uh, for anybody that is not computer savvy, we will, uh, you can come into our office and we will actually walk everybody through it and, um, we will register them for you. We also have kiosks at the UPCC as well as the emergency for, uh, those unattached patients to fill out that information and so that we can get them attached to a family physician. Yeah. That, that's great. Um, you know, I remember in the days gone by, uh, my, uh, my previous doctor retired and, um- You're on your own ... trying, and I'm phoning around, uh, you know, trying to find somebody- Yeah ... who might have space, putting my name on lists and that sort of thing. Um, and this is so, this is so efficient. Yeah. And in this day and age it just makes sense, and I'm really glad to hear that this is in place. And I'll make sure to spread the word as well to people I know in my generation of doing things the old way. Um, so- Yeah ... really glad to have you here today. And yes- Thank you ... I agree, um, with what I heard earlier from one of my other colleagues is the, the importance of including this in our planning. Um, we absolutely need to, uh, consider health. So thank you. Thank you. All right. Thanks for coming. Appreciate it. Thank you. Take care everybody. Thanks for the presentation as well. Thank you. Next delegation is Amanda Smith and John Caldarella. Just hit the X at the top. Can you go back a presentation? We know. Okay. If you could just click it on the one, it should be open already. Oh. Oh. Oh, okay. There we go. Just the full screen on the top left there. Do you want full screen as well? Yeah, let's go full, full screen. Do you mind if I... Yeah. Okay. There we go. Okay. Thank you everybody, uh, for having us, um, approach you guys to dis- discuss the st- state of farming in the, in the, in Langley. Um, in, on June 1st, I believe everybody would've received an eight-page document, um, in your inboxes. Uh, we actually shared that document with anybody who wanted it, um, 'cause we were quite proud of the work that we have done. And that document is not slated in terms of one way. It is literally a snapshot of all of the issues that we've had and collected in the last four years. So we always wanna go to the next slide Um, right. So BC Farmers Markets, uh, institutes, what are they? Their institutes strive to serve the needs of the local agricultural community and meet monthly to identify and address issues of interest and concern to local farms, farmers, and a- agricultural stakeholders. Members also sit on committees in the wider community advocating for farmers' interests at the community, municipal, provincial, and federal le- levels. And that excerpt was taken from the Farmers and Women's Institute Regulation Act. So these are all of the people that we've spoken to, and that, that four years was a lot of communication bet- between primarily farmers, um, and then also with st- staff within the Ministry of Agriculture, staff within the ALC, staff within Metro Vancouver, members of the Agricultural Advisory Committee, staff within the, in the Township of Langley, staff at the, uh, Township of Langley bylaws, Langley Advanced Times, Country Life, and at this point we're now brought to talking with the BC SPCA. Um, but now we have this slide that we wanted to share with you because when we did all of that, all that talking, um, it's a lot of homework actually. Like, we've had to read so many bylaws and meeting with government staff, it's quite amazing. But my, m- our last meeting w- was really with the ALC, and they wanted me to show you guys, um, all the applications received by type and administrative region. So you'll see, uh, in the South Coast region, we actually have the highest amount of applications going to the ALC. Um, the reason for that is the Township of Langley has a standing order that all applications get just farmed to the ALC and is not vetted at the local level. Um, all of the other regions, they actually vet at the local level. So for example, uh, there was an application for non-farm use that was brought to the ALC in February. They're just getting to it now because of the extra workload that we're adding to them. And the ALC actually lost more staff, so that means all applications are gonna take longer. And the ALC actually admitted that if an application that has nothing to do with farming, it gets to the bottom of the pile. So, um, this application specifically about non-farm use, they're just getting to it now, and it was submitted in February. So everything is taking more time, and that's one of the reasons that we're here today to share this with you because there's only three communities in the entire province that has that longstanding order that everything gets farmed off to the ALC. And ours came up with, came in- into play with the previous CEO, um, and that came in when we became a regulated community. So really the state of farming is really delicate right now, um, just with some of the policies that we've had over the last 33 years and that longstanding order when we became a regulated community. So that should be a bit concerning, um, with amount of applications, so we had to share that with you. And it's gonna be actually added to our State of Farming document because a lot of this ALC stuff is kinda worked in, in that eight-page document and, um, we'll go to the next slide. So really at the end of the day, we would ... I know that nothing can happen right now, uh, but we want the longstanding order thrown out because all of the other regions within the Fraser Valley, their Agricultural Advisory Committee actually does vetting of applications. And you have a very passionate group of people who feel that they don't have a lot to do at the Agricultural Advisory Committee. That would be something that they would love to do. And it doesn't always have to sit at the AAC. If the AAC members feel that they can't make a decision, then it does go to the ALC. So that's kind of what we're, uh, what we're asking for today, that it, that it just be conc- um, you know, considered and m- in the next few months, you know, as we kind of move forward towards a potential rural plan, we can, we can revisit this. We wanted to share it with you. I think that might be it. Yeah. Take questions. Yes. Thank you, Amanda, very much, and John, for coming and for your report. Very thorough as usual. You mentioned that there's only three communities in BC that have this longstanding, um, order. What three, and are those regulated communities like Langley Township unfortunately is? No. So the ALC couldn't share with me due to privacy the other two communities. Okay. But it, it's not connected because we have four regulated communities in BC, so they have nothing to do with each other. The regulated community came through the Ministry of Ag and has nothing to do with the ALC. But the ALC's being punished over the last, you know, d- two decades with extra work because of that standing order that the previous CEO put in place. Okay. Well, I guess where I was going is I always thought we referred to ALC because we were a regulated community. They don't, they don't have anything to do with each other. We don't have to do that. No. Oh, okay. Well that's good to know. [laughs] The other thing, on your delegation form, um, you mentioned that the desired resolution you wanna see is confirmed rural plan terms of reference, um, commitment with bylaws and soils dumping fines. Can you give us a bit more background on those items? Well, I mean, talking to the, uh, soils educator, he was also very concerned about where, where, where bylaws was going with this because again, reading the document, like we are there to support farmers, but we also see on ALR, ALR land dumping, and there's been l- in some cases no recourse. Mm-hmm. And the previous soils person from, uh, Richmond ... Well, I, I should, the guy in Richmond, he actually is collecting a lot of money in terms of fines, and we don't really know why that can't be the case here, here in the township with all the illegal dumping.Okay, and by that you mean soil deposits? Yeah. That shouldn't be happening. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Uh, and that's an, uh, responsibility that the township needs to fulfill? Okay. And then the rural plan terms of reference, I think the rural plan is- I don't, I don't q- I don't quite know where that terms of reference is at yet- Okay ... to be honest. Um, our last agricultural advisory committee meeting we didn't talk about it, so I'm assuming it's still sitting in staff. Yeah. Well, I think these are good points that you've raised here today, and certainly reflect a lot of research, so thank you. And, and is, this is a very awkward stuff to talk about, to bring to the council table. It, it's kind of, like when you start to find out all this information, it's kind of embarrassing. Yeah. Yeah. So read the e- eight page. It's gonna be a working document, and we'll just keep adding to it, and the whole ALC stuff will be included. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Um, thanks for, uh, coming to, uh, yeah, our council today and delegating. Um, you mentioned other communities, um, that are not regulated, um, don't, don't throw everything to the ALC. So do those communities have like a, um, their agricultural, uh, committees vetting some of those? Yes. They do. Mm-hmm. They, all of those, they do. And what would be the criteria for those, those committee members to be making decisions like that for, on behalf... And, and do they only make decisions on non-farm use, or do they make decisions on all, um- Non-farm use ... Oh, only on non-farm use. Yes. Okay, 'cause that's probably a big, um, you know, um, yeah, good distinction because I would think then, um, that would take care of, uh, a lot- Mm-hmm ... of the stuff that the ALC's seeing right now from, from Langley, would you say? Mm-hmm. Yeah, okay. Yeah. Like, no applicant should need t- to wait six months. Yeah. No, right. Okay, thanks for that. Yes. I, I look at the South Coast region and see the non-adhering residential use applications are right at the top of the list. Do you know what the makeup of those are? No. Are a lot of those like, uh, families trying to, uh, have another fam- like subdivide a little bit to have a, a- Yes ... another family member on it? Mm-hmm. Because of the, you know, the cost of land down here. Mm-hmm. And I see it's also kinda high in the Okanagan. Uh, I would suspect that might be true there also. Okay, so, um, yeah, that's a, that's an interesting thing because I live in, in that kinda situation, and it would be, uh... I know how many people comment on, uh, they would like to have that similar situation, uh, so that their family can be close, and also so the young people can afford to, to, um, to have a piece of land. Yeah. Th- when we wrote the State of Farming, we had mentioned subdi- subdividing. Uh, the only comment we had is because we have a low water table in some areas already, the more we subdivide and we have to dig more wells and having a septic, it, it kind of is a bit challenging. So I also s- we also said in the document that we wanted more of a review from the Ministry of Environment about our water table, because we, we think that there's more vulnerable aquifers than what's, than what's stated. Yeah, because we recently had that r- that, that, uh, study done by the provincial government saying that at best our aquifers are holding, uh, uh, are holding- Mm-hmm ... at a, at the current levels, and some of them are declining. And the only ones that aren't declining and are recovering are where we've put, uh, pipe water in. Okay, thanks. Yeah. I just had one question. Okay. If you could, you know, the slide, it's pretty simple. Throw out the longstanding order, non-farm use applications to be directed to... What are you referring to, longstanding order? That's, that's just what they're called, and that's from the ALC. That, that's what, that's what she t- that's what the, our, our local person was telling us, is that it is a longstanding order that comes from the municipality. They make that up. It has nothing to do with the ALC. They just pi- that standing order just gives them more work. But you're saying the township has one of these? Mm-hmm. But yet all non-farm use applications come to council for approval. So where is the longstanding order that everything be directed directly to the ALC? I don't have it in writing. It just, it's just coming from the ALC. Well, this is the first I've heard the township has this, so. Yeah. Thank you for coming here today. I appreciate it very much. Thank you. Thank you. Next delegation is Janet Ingram Johnson. Please come forward. I think you need some technical help with these. Thank you. I need to give you that, but not, just have it on the screen, but not play. Okay. Then I can play. Is yours the video or the presentation? No, the video. Okay. The traffic. Okay. And then play is just in the bottom left here. What do I do? Uh, it'll just be the left click here when you're ready to play it. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. All right. So, uh, thank you for coming here today, and, uh, please go ahead. Thank you very much for having me. Uh, th- thank you for hearing my request for, um, traffic controls and a crosswalk at the intersection of 256th Street and the Fraser Highway. This intersection is the only uncontrolled crossroads on the Fraser Highway between Aldergrove and the Langley bypass. There are controlled lights and crosswalks at 260th Street, 248th Street, 244th Street, 240th Street, 232nd Street, 48th Avenue, 222nd Street, and 216th Street, but none at this unsafe intersection. It is unsafe for pedestrians, it's unsafe for cyclists, it's unsafe for motorists. It's unsafe for vehicles of all sizes, especially for the school bus that has to cross the highway twice each school day. 256th Street is a designated school bus route. Surveys will often point to below optimal traffic levels before guidelines call for controls, but it doesn't take rocket science to realize people avoid ni- nasty intersections and find safer routes. A township of Langley commission study of the 16th Avenue Corridor is calling for traffic controls at 16th Avenue and 256th Street because of safety concerns, despite the numerical threshold not being met. And 16th Avenue isn't even a bus route. The Fraser Highway is. There are bus stops near 256th Street for Eastwood and Westwood travel, but riders face such a daunting task of crossing the highway, [clears throat] often during peak rush hours, that one person coming home from Langley stays on the bus all the way to 264th Street, crosses 264th at controlled walks, and then waits for the bus coming back to 256th Street. How ridiculous is that? When I cycle from my home just off 256th Street, I have to ride over to 248th Street just to get across the highway. This intersection has seen many accidents and many more near misses over the years. There was a nasty accident there only last Wendy, Wednesday, when a v- when a vehicle wound up in a ditch. There is al- now also a large farm stand at the northwest corner of the junction, with multiple access points adding to congestion. I'd now like to show you a short video. The videographer was only able to film from the southeast corner of the intersection before he, because he found it too dangerous to cross the road on foot. It's supposed to start. There we go. It's, uh, it's gone forward for some reason. Need to start at the beginning. Okay. Thank you. So you'll see the, the traffic, relentless traffic. Now there's a car arriving from the north on 256th Street, and you won't believe your eyes. Turns into the uphill oncoming left turn lane. How dangerous is that? So as Langley's traffic increases, you know, day by day, why is this one very dangerous intersection still not, still not having traffic lights? I don't understand. I'm sending, I'm sending a, presenting a petition. I don't see much time I've got left. I'm presenting a petition that's signed by those who live in or frequent the area, and are tired of finding elaborate ways around this major headache. With the petition are some quotes from area residents, including from the Valley Equestrian Therapeutic Association, which sits very close to the highway and is used by many young families. Finally, I would ask, no, I beseech council to kickstart the process for making the intersection of 256th Street and the Fraser H- Fraser Highway safer. Please do something. Thank you. All right. Thank you for coming here today. Um, certainly agree. Uh, Councilperson Butt? Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I do actually have a, a motion after everyone's spoken, um- Oh. Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Do you have any questions for the delegate? Yes, I do. Okay. And Janet, thank you for coming. I know that you are a long-standing community supporter. I see you've got your Rotary Believe There Is Good In The World. Thank you for coming. I'm a, a, a Rotarian as well. And, uh, you've been a long-term volunteer. And you, if I can tell by this, uh, delegation, you're a former reporter from what I remember as well. I'm a journalist, yes. Was. Um, you do live i- in the, in the immediate area? Yes, I live two blocks north of the Fraser Highway, just off 56th Street. And I think you're seeing that. I know some of the farmers up in that area, and it has been a challenge. So I will be asking the mayor for a motion later on. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Councillor Ferguson. Councillor Goerzen? Yeah, I have to agree with, uh, that intersection being a concern. I've been caught at that one a few times, uh, trying to get across. And when I saw the fella turn into the left-hand turn lane, uh, it looks an awful lot like, uh, what's going on at 16th Avenue also. Yeah. So, uh, yes, I'm looking forward to, uh, what, uh, Councillor Ferguson's gonna bring forward. Thank you. Yes, I think if the council is very willing to pr- to spend money on 256th and 16th Avenue, that 2- 256th and the Fraser Highway should be an even greater priority. Oh, that, uh... Hi, Janet. Good to see you. Hi. Thank you. Uh. Um, yeah, thank you for your presentation, and I really appreciate you taking the time to provide a video. Um, that's the best way to present the case on what's actually happening there. And, um, I concur with the thoughts I've already heard here. I don't have any questions for you other than I look forward to hearing the motion. Um, I think, uh, that, uh, you've presented a good case for change to be made at that intersection. So thank you for your time. Thank you all for hearing me. Thank you very much. All right. Um, okay. Next delegation is Jamie... We'll do him at the end, Councillor Ferguson. We'll do him last. Jamie Lynn Dixon, please come forwardThank you for coming here today. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, Mayor and members of council. My name is Jamie Dixon, and I am standing before you today to advocate for urgent safety improvements at the intersection of Fraser Highway and 264th. As you guys know, my son tragically died as a result of a motor vehicle accident in 2024. He was crossing Fraser Highway in the marked crosswalk on the west side of the intersection, traveling southbound when he was struck. This intersection is inherently dangerous. The sharp, nearly 90-degree turn creates significant challenges, particularly for large trucks, which sometimes mount or cross over the curb while completing the turn. In addition, the overgrown bushes at the northwest corner has created a serious blind spot for drivers navigating the intersection. Many pedestrians are aware of this danger and do stand back near the pole to reduce the risk of being struck. These hazards are compound by accessibility features for people who are visually impaired, which has been identified by the provincial Ministry of Transportation and Transit, that are poorly maintained and very... And only partially functioning since at least the day of the accident. We were there on Wednesday, and it still wasn't working. Nothing can bring my son back. However, meaningful action can help prevent another family from experiencing the devastating loss and trauma that our family has endured. I would respectfully ask the township to take the following immediate steps to improve safety at this intersection. Remove the overgrown bushes at the northwest corner of Fraser Highway and 264th Street to eliminate that blind spot. Repair, repair and properly maintain all accessibility features for people who are visually impaired. Install flexible delineators and raise the sidewalk at the northwest corner to better separate pedestrians from turning vehicles and making the intersection safer and more pedestrian-friendly. I understand that this intersection is located on a provincial roadway. Nevertheless, I urge the township to work directly and urgently with the provincial Ministry of Transportation and Transit to implement these improvements and address the broader safety concerns at this location. I urge, I urge each of the council members to please come to the a- intersection and see firsthand the dangers that are surrounding the area. No family should have to endure what ours have endured. I respectfully ask council to treat this matter with the urgency it deserves, and to take meaningful action before another life is lost. Thank you for your time and your, your attention and your commitment to public safety. All right. So there's no questions of council. I've made notes of your requests, and I'll follow up with staff on those, and very much appreciate the submission. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next delegation is C5, David Lapierre. Please come forward. All right. Please go ahead. Thank you. Mine is, uh, mine is a, a request that I have. Uh, back in September, uh, uh, 2022, we were looking for a house, and we found a house, and they had a rental unit. So went to the township of Langley and asked them what we can do about it because we're in our 70s, and we don't really wanna deal with tenants anymore 'cause we have for quite a long time. And they told us to get an affidavit, and we did that, and they would send an inspector, and they did that, and everything was hunky dory. I didn't... We didn't have to pay the extra utility fees or anything like that. Two and a half years later, um, things changed. Uh, the township of Langley now wants the charges starting 2027. Uh, 30% on our utilities, $145 a year. Adds up to about $700, and, uh, we get nothing for it. All we do is follow all the rules. We have small garbage cans. Uh, we water very, very strictly, and why would we wanna pay $700 for nothing? We're not gonna rent it. H- how is that fair? I don't... I just don't get it, and neither do, does any of my friends. Resolution, don't charge me. Period. What's that? I have a question. Councilor Trevorrow. Yeah. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Lapierre, for coming and speaking to council. Uh, so as... If I understand this correctly, you bought a new house in 2022 that had a suite in the basement. You decommissioned that suite. You've never rented it out. You've sent in an affidavit saying you'll never rent it out. I wouldn't purchase it off the owner until he got... dealt with the renter. Okay. Uh, but you use that s- that area downstairs as a personal den. Yeah. It's not a suite. Yeah. It's my, where I watch sports. [laughs] Yeah. I d- like I'm missing the logic here of why if you don't have a suite, why would you have to pay extra utility fees? It makes absolutely no sense to me. Really does. Well, I, I think this matter needs to be referred to staff to follow up on. And, uh, when we're having delegations under our procedure bylaw, that's all we can do, is put a motion to refer to staff, and I'm gonna put that motion forward today relative to your delegation. I, I, I hope, I, I hope it gets cleared up, because I'm gonna be here in November if it isn't. I'm n- I'm not gonna give up on this. Yeah. Okay. To me- Well, you don't have a suite. I, I don't have a suite, and I never will, and I'm getting too old to have one. [laughs] But anyhow, thank you for your time. I'm glad you heard me. See what happens. Thanks. No, just have a few more questions. Oh, sure. Yeah, so if you can come back. Yeah, so I just wanted to clarify actually. Councilor Richter stated that your suite was decommissioned, but that's, that's not the case. You just don't rent it. Don't rent it, yeah. That's correct, yeah, so it's good to clarify that. Took out the fire doors and stuff like that. So it's not decommissioned, you just don't rent it. That's correct. Just wanted to clarify that statement. Councilor Bailey, go ahead. That's along the lines of what I was gonna ask, 'cause I had to go through that ordeal, uh, at, at a house I had in Surrey. Do you have... And, and the, the two questions are fridge and stove. Do you have a fridge and stove in that suite? Yeah, I, I mean, i- i- it could be a suite. Yeah, because I, I, I solved that by getting rid of the fridge and getting rid of the stove- Yeah ... and then the requirement is, is, is gone and- And- ... I, I- That- That's how I got rid of them ... that was my point exactly. I'm buying a house. It has a fridge. It has a stove. It has cupboards. Do I have to rip it out? I wouldn't buy it. If that's what I have to do, I wouldn't buy it. Okay. And they said, "It was, it's not your fault. You didn't build it. It just happens to have a suite." Okay, thanks. Yeah, so I appreciate the delegation. I think it's, uh, it's good. I'll follow up with you directly. I think someone from my office d- did that as well, and I think what we'll do is we'll clarify the township is on a path to solving exactly this issue. And so I think it's a matter of communicating that, uh, a little bit better than we have, and so I'll, I'll definitely be doing that. Great. Thank you very much for your delegation today. Great. Thank you. Thank you. All right, next delegation is C6, Stephanie and Jamie Hackl. All right, so, uh, you have five minutes. Uh, please go ahead. Thank you again for coming here today. I have some pictures, but we just brought them to... You- Is there an overhead projector anywhere back? So we get this. Okay. Thank you. [sighs] Okay. We are here today respectfully to ask for your support, um, and allow us to preserve our little red farmhouse on our 10-acre family property. This house was built in or around 1926. We're not quite sure exactly of the year, and as it approaches its 100th anniversary, it represents a piece of Langley's history that cannot be recreated once it's gone. Every year there are a few, there are fewer and fewer homes at, of this age still standing, and with each year, it, with each one that disappears is a small part of our community. Our community story disappears with it. For our family, this is much more than an old house. We've had our three children there, and had had hopes of raising their children there one day also. It is a home where generations have lived, gathered, and built memories. We are still in touch with the old owners who we bought it from, um, who grew up in that home with three brothers. When we purchased the property, um, they were terrified that we were gonna tear it down, and they were thrilled when we invited them back after we had renovated the house. Our hope is to preserve this as a secondary dwelling so that our grandparents, our parents, and eventually our children and grandchildren may be able to continue living on the same property. We want this to remain a true legacy property, and a place where multiple generations can stay connected to the land and to Langley's history. My grandparents Alf- Alfred and Eleanor Deglan were proud, uh, Langley pioneers. They helped shape this community during a very different time when Langley was built on strong family values, agriculture, hard work, and neighbor help, neighbors helping neighbors. Uh, my grandfather owned eight acres at the top of Willoughby at 68th and 204th, and that's where I grew up. Preserving this farmhouse is our way of honoring their legacy and ensuring the future generations understand where our family came from and the role that they played in this community. Our family has always believed in investing in Langley. We do love it here. Not for ourselves, but for the benefit of the community. My father, Alf Deglan, was a longtime Langley realtor with Home Life Benchmark. Uh, we are the owners of Minto Contracting, the daycare friends at Five Corners, and we're also investors in Haven and Stevens Langley, alongside the Rachinsky brothers. My husband Jamie is also the GM of the A1 Langley Thunder lacrosse team, but he hates public speaking, so that's why I'm doing this. We've chosen to build our lives and our businesses in, and our future here because we believe in this community and we want to contribute to its success. Over the past several years, we have worked diligently and in good faith with both the township of Langley and the ALC, trying to find any reasonable solution that would allow this little red farmhouse to remain. We've gone back and forth countless times exploring every option that's been suggested. We've offered to permanently decommission the home as a residence, and use it only as a storage building or an office. Um, we had a bee farm on the property, then we switched to a tree farm, but the tree farm wasn't, um, big enough to support the ALC use of the property and qualify for farm status. Um, at every turn our goal has been remaining the same, to preserve a piece of Langley's history. We're not asking for an additional home or development opportunity, we're simply asking for the chance to save a nearly 100-year-old farmhouse that has stood on this land for generations and longer than any of us have been around. We are willing to do whatever is necessary to protect it, because once it's demolished, a piece of Langley's heritage will be gone forever. Our property's 10 acres. We are fortunate enough to have the space to preserve this historic farmhouse, um, without affecting neighboring properties or changing the rural character of the area. We simply want to keep the existing home that has already s- stood for a century, rather than see another historic building disappear from... [crying] Sorry. Across BC, communities are realizing the importance of preserving heritage wherever possible. It's not only found in museums or designated downtown buildings, sometimes it's found in a modest farmhouse that has quietly stood for generations, witnessing the growth and transformation of an entire community around it. Once a house like this is demolished, its history is gone forever. As council, you have the opportunity to help preserve not only a building, but a family history and small, small piece of Langley's heritage. Nearly 100 years after it was built, this little red farmhouse still stands, and we hope that with your support it will continue standing for another 100 years, allowing future generations of our family to appreciate the sacrifices, hard work, and values that those, of those who came before them. Today we respectfully ask for you to help us preserve this home, to protect a piece of Langley's history, and allow our family to continue building our future while respecting our past. Thank you for your time. Good to see you again, you guys. I, now I've been, I've actually gone out there and had a look at this house and, uh, from my o- my understanding when I was talking to you before, was that you missed, uh, the possibility of having this declared heritage by one year. Am I correct? Yes, but we did talk to, um, the heritage society and they no longer, um, uh, deem a, a year to have it technic- uh, considered heritage. So that when we applied years ago and started asking about this, they said it, it missed heritage by one year, so then we went, "Oh, okay, what can we do?" Um, but now they're saying that there's no set year, but old ho- uh, homes as old as this are all classified as heritage. Um, it- it's got like half a foundation underneath it, it's dirt, half dirt, half foundation. So, um, yeah, now they're deeming all old homes as, as heritage. So there's not a specific year that would've granted us in. And that was well over a year ago, correct? Oh, this was probably five years ago now. Yep. And you've also got, uh, you've got some children, correct? We do. And d- one day you're, you're looking at, uh, having the kids play there, even, even come and play for the Thunder, right? Well- Yeah ... my- Grandkid does already. Yeah. My grandpa, um, Talif Deglan, he lives, uh, with my parents, but ideally we wanna move him into the house, and then once he's gone, my parents are getting up there, so is Jamie's, we'd like to move them into this property. Um, and then one- Other than us. [laughs] And that, that house is definitely livable. I, I was in it and inspected it- It's beautiful ... and it looks great. It's- We renovated it. It's... The old owners that we're still in touch with, um, I got these old pictures from him. Um, when we bought it, they thought that we were gonna tear it down, and then we renovated the inside and brought them back to take photos and they were crying, watching, looking at the house because they thought that we were gonna tear it down. And we're still in touch with him, and he was wanting to be here today, but he couldn't make it, so. Well, thanks for bringing this forward because I recently did a tour with the, uh, heritage society and, and, uh, one, one of the themes that came through all the time was that too many of these heritage buildings have been torn down in the past, especially, uh, out in the Aldergrove area. So, thanks for bringing this forward. I look forward to, uh, seeing how we can keep this, uh, building in place. Thanks. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you for coming. And, um, I can see you're super emotional about this, but, um, I'm not super familiar with your story, and I'm just wondering, what is it that you're being asked to do? Because clearly you were, used the word demolish. So is the ALC asking you to demolish? We're to put a- No, the- Sorry, the township Yeah We have a bond with you guys for, I think, $50,000 for a demo permit because we built our house in the far back of the property. Um- Five years ago I see But we had hoped that, um, we could ke- I know there's a lot of other p- properties in Langley that have two, three homes or monster homes and all the things, and we had just thought that maybe this could be passed because it's a family property. We bought this for our forever home, and truly did hope that eventually it, it's a family legacy. It... Cost of living is ridiculous. We have three children, so we're probably- I get it ... gonna have one living with us for a very long time, and the red house would just be perfect, and we could put them in the front of the property, and we're in the back and- Okay Um... Okay, thank you. And, um, I'm happy to help support whatever... I don't know if someone held a motion or whatever, but, um, again, not super familiar with the situation, so I'll, I'll leave it for now. But thank you for delegating, and hopefully we can help you. Thank you. We're also gonna have to fight the, or... Fight. Deal with the ALC. Okay. So, because- That was actually one of my questions. It is, it is in the ALR? We're ALR. Ah, okay. So we, we had a bee farm, and we did that for a long time. But to be honest, the reason we stopped is because bees, um, poop all over the place, and it's hard to get off v- like, literally, it's hard to get off vehicles. My family lives on the 10 acres next door, and it was just a headache. And then we did a tree farm- Okay ... and then the ALC said the tree farm wasn't large enough. We had to do more acreage. So we were then going, thinking about trying to go that route or decommission it, just to not have it taken down. We could use it as an office for our businesses. Um- Well, there's about four acres and the creek 'Cause we have what they call, you've probably heard of the Flower Do residence. Kind of the same situation, I think, where they had to decommission this beautiful little heritage home. But anyways, um, I don't know if that's gonna bring you any good news. [laughs] I mean, we s- we just don't want it taken down. Well, yeah We have businesses. We can use it as an office. We're willing to do anything- Okay ... just to not have this beautiful house demo'd. You'll be able to see it in the pictures. Okay, thank you for coming. Councillor Hunter. Yes. I really appreciate you taking the time to fill us in on this and also your passion for history. That's wonderful. Uh, I think this is another one that we have to send to staff to work with you to come up with some sort of a solution. Just seems a shame to lose that piece of heritage. I, I just don't understand why you can't get a heritage, like an, an official heritage designation for it- Well- ... from somebody ... I called Fred Pepin, and he had come out years ago when we first- Yeah ... when I first contacted him to make sure that we didn't have to tear this thing down, and he came out, and he, at that time, had said it was one year off of being classified heritage, or we would've been okay to keep it. Um, and then he, I contacted him again, but he, I think, is away on vacation. But he was all f- you know, all for supporting it and, and it, like I said, it, it doesn't even need to be rented. It's not about that. We just don't want this torn down. Yeah. It just would be such a shame. And my grandparents, Alf and Eleanor, they owned eight acres up at the top of Willoughby, where all the new development is. But, um, there was a, actually a newspaper article with my grandfather, the house that Alf built, because he built it with his own hands, and that was up in Willoughby all those years ago, and his house had to be, obviously, torn down. Um, but this is another one. It, it doesn't need to be. There's no development, and it's just this little old farmhouse that we would like to keep and hopefully have one of our kids in, so they won't be in our house till they're 40. [laughs] I can certainly relate to that point of view. Um, I... Y- you're on ALR land. There must be some provision to be able to have a secondary dwelling of some sort. Unless it's for farm help- Yeah ... specifically, but the farm has to meet their criteria, and bees didn't do it. Um, the tree farm wasn't large enough, and then we have a big ravine that runs through the back of the property, a fish-bearing stream. Um, so we don't have enough space. We could... I mean, there is space. We could do whatever they want to try to make it so that it would be deemed farm help. But- Yeah ... we just wanna keep the family- Well, even a home site severance might be possible 'cause it's the old home site, right? And it's still in the family. And you're saying that you're gonna have your dad come and live in there? Well, my, my parents have owned the property next to us for 30 years now. Yeah They have 10 acres next to us. We bought the one, we call it the compound, and we've got the 10 acres next, so we're a 20-acre compound, and we just wanna try to- One of them is the first. Her parents are my parents. [laughs] [laughs] We're just, we're just trying to keep this thing up, and I, I didn't think I would care enough about something like this. But as soon as we saw the house, when we went into it and demolished and, um, renovated the inside, there were, um- Newspaper- ... newspaper clippings from, like, 1918, 1920, and they were- Oh ... coming out of the walls. We should have kept them, but- Yeah ... I thought that it's just a shame. It would just be heartbreaking to have this kind of a home torn down. Yeah. If it was new, if it was a trailer, I, I would not care, but it's just, there's just a lot to it, and the property, and the pictures from before my parents owned the ne- like, it's just, it's just a shame. Yeah. Well, maybe even you two could retire into it someday when you wanna downsize and let the kids take the big house. Yeah. [laughs] Think of that. Yeah. [laughs] As long as they look after the houseYeah. Well, that's always an issue, isn't it? Well, yeah, I'm definitely supporting a referral on this to staff. Thank you. So thank you for coming and talking to us today. Councilor Brooks. Yeah, thank you, Mr.- Mr. Hackel for coming. Stephanie. I did one quick question before I know there'll be, um, a motion to refer this to, uh, staff. You didn't say you're related to Alf Deglan, did you? That's my father. Oh my g- I knew him from the Langley Rugby Club a number of years ago. We were both on the executive together. He was a great guy. Mm. And then he passed away, and I, I was out of service. No, back to- Oh, that- Yeah ... that's my dad's cousin. Oh, okay. Sorry. Yeah. Not my dad. Alf was a realtor. Al. There's- Oh, okay. I got the two mixed up ... there's four Alf Deglans- Sorry about that ... and then there's Al, and he's the cousin. But... Okay. But were they both involved with rugby, though? Oh, yes. Okay. Oh, yeah. Okay My dad, soccer, rugby. Okay. So I knew both of them. Yeah. Sorry, I wanna clarify that. I didn't... And so back to your issue, I think that, uh, there'll be a referral motion. We'll have to look into it. I think I'd like to come down to the property. I'm sure other members of council haven't been there would like to as well, and thank you for coming again. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship, and thanks very much for coming, for your presentation. Um, ahead of the delegation, just kinda looking into it a little bit. The, our zoning bylaw that applies to your property allows for up to two homes. And so in your communication with our staff, have they cited specifically it's the ALC's regulations that are requiring you to take down the home? Or would it be the municipality's? We'd have to take some of it down to get down to 968 square feet. Right, okay. We went overboard with our house that we built in the back, and the square footage is what is keeping it from being kept. Right, okay. So we built our big house that's in the back of the property- Mm ... that you can't see from the front. Right. And then we didn't, but we didn't know that at the time, that that was gonna factor into this. And had it been, we would've shrunk the house because it's much too big for any of our liking, and to solve this problem, but we didn't know. Right. And then once we finished the house, went to get the final, and then they were like, "Well, no, this is too much because of the..." And we, we, we didn't, we weren't aware. We had no idea. And had we been aware, we would've definitely shrunk our house down with enough to keep it. I think 2020 is the new rule came in. Right. That's right when we started building, so it was too late. Mm. And has there been in- indication, 'cause, uh, for our heritage registry, uh, there's sort of two classifications be- uh, it's not quite as stringent as I've, I'm aware of, like, the city of Vancouver, where it's, you know, if you get that ultimate, uh, heritage designation, you're untouchable. Yeah. Have you, have you been told or has there been indication that if you are able to achieve this heritage status, the home is absolutely protected, cannot be altered? Yes. Okay. But, um, so when I first approached them, and, uh, maybe it was six years ago, at the very beginning, they said, "Oh, it just missed heritage by a year. Sorry, we can't help you." And then since then, obviously, things have changed. I haven't kept in touch enough to know what the rules are now. But as far as I know, they said there's not a technical year, but then we can have heritage come out, relook at the property or relook at the house. And then if they deem it heritage or old enough to be considered that, then we could have, um, uh, we could have help from them to- Right ... make it somewhat untouchable. Right, okay. So it's the Langley Heritage Society that would be- Yes ... coming out. It wouldn't be some provincial organization. No. Okay. Langley Heritage is what I would, what I've started with. And- Awesome. Okay. Appreciate the clarification. Thank you very much, and I'll be supporting any referral that we have today. Thank you. Councilor Bailey. Yeah, if everyone's finished, I'd like to move that, uh- Yeah, no, we'll just wrap up the delegation first and then we'll- Okay ... deal with motions. So, um, yeah, so appreciate you coming. I think it's Councilor Pratt, I think, clarified a couple of the key factors. Um, if staff suggested that you engage a, a heritage consultant similar to Donald Luxton or something like that, that they do a heritage assessment, and it's not just based on age, it's based on a s- point scoring system of, of a number of factors. Has that been suggested to you that that would basically outline the heritage value of the structure to get you that designation? No. Had that ever been suggested to you? No, it hasn't. Okay. So I'll make sure that we follow up with you directly on a potential process to, to solve this problem for you. So I'll do that myself, okay? Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much and, uh, I'll be in touch. Uh, and thank you very much for coming today. Are you doing these pictures? Yes. If you can please provide those to the clerk, that would be great. Thank you. Thanks. All right. We'll make those sure those are distributed to council. Thank you. Councilor Bailey, go ahead. Yeah, I'd like to move a motion that, uh, we have staff assist the Hackels, uh, to, uh, save, uh, save this house. I second. All right. That's seconded by Councilor Rint. Yeah, go ahead. Any discussion? Yeah, I just, uh, I, I see it a shame, you know. Like, you, you have to take a part of a heritage house off to meet a, a, uh, a standard or that kinda stuff. And I, I believe policies are guidelines and, uh, things like that. So in the name of heritage, uh, I've been in that house. Uh, I've, I've seen it and I've, uh, seen the property. I see no reason why we can't, uh, support saving some, uh, history before it's lost. Yeah. Being on the Heritage Advisory Committee for the last eight years, and we talk a lot about this kinda stuff, and some of the frustration, um, uh, from our, some of our rural property owners is the, is that they can't, um, preserve some of the rural, um, properties and some of the buildings in our rural areas. So this is a classic example of, um, of that exact thing. So I'm obviously supporting, um, any referral that we can, uh, any help that we can to, um, preserve this, this home. All right. Seeing no discussion, I'll call to question on that referral of C6.Carries unanimously. Go in reverse order. C5, Councillor Richter, you wish to make a motion? Uh, yes I do. I wish to refer C5, Mr. Lapierre's, uh, Mr. Lapierre's delegation to staff. I'll second. Seconded by Councillor Kunz. Joseph? No further discussion? Question on that referral? That carries unanimously. Councillor Ferguson, I think you mentioned C3- Mr. Mayor, that the, that the delegation of Janet Ingram Johnson be referred to staff, and that a traffic light installation at the intersection of 256th Street and Fraser Highway be referred to the 2027 budget Yeah, I'll second that. Uh, go ahead and- That's pretty well it. Thank you ... no further discussion? Can we call a question on that referral of C3? That carries unanimously. Can we move on to reports to council? Yes, your honor. Councillor Richter? Yes, what do you have? Yes. Um, I think actually all of the delegations today need to be referred to staff, so I'd like to refer the remaining delegations- Please do it, please do it individually if you wish to do that. I'm not sure what items would be work items- Well, it's one, two, and four ... yeah, so if you could please do them individually if that's what you'd like to do. Okay. I'll do them individually. All right, so starting with C1, what's your referral motion? Uh, refer to staff, um, to, uh... Well, all we can do is refer to staff, but I really think we need to start working with the family practice to identify what types of areas are needed for new, uh, practices to be established in. All right. Well, that presupposes that's not already going on, but, uh, I'll second the referral. Uh, any discussion on that referral? Call to question on the referral of C1. Councillor Richter, you wish to refer C2? Yes, I'd like to refer C2 to staff. And w- what kind of report are you looking for? Well, um, clearly there's an issue with this long-standing order that I think- We identified, though, that that may not be the case, but if you'd like to clarify that- Well, yeah, I think it should go to staff- Yeah ... for a report and- Been on council eight years, I've never heard of this, but, uh, let's refer that to council for a report. I'll second that referral. Is there any other discussion on that referral? Seeing none, call to question on that referral of C2. That carries unanimously. And Councillor Richter, you wished to do C4. Yes. I'd like to refer that to staff, uh, to work with, I guess it's MOTI, Ministry of Transportation. Yes. We've done one on this delegation before, and there are a number of work items that are ongoing, but if you wish to refer it again. Well, maybe we could get an update report then on outstanding matters on it. I believe, Mr. Kuner, that's an outstanding work item anyway, but we can certainly get that confirmed. That is correct, Your Worship. All right. So second that. Any more discussion? Referral? Seeing none, call to question on... Oh, Councillor Martins, go ahead. Yeah, sorry. I was just, um, wanted just to follow up on your last comment, sir. It's a, um, there's work items underway on the, this intersection. Um, is it possible to get a memo update if it's going to take considerable time to address the, um, work items? That, that's correct, Your Worship. The intent here is the referral to staff would provide a status update, uh, to council with respect to 264th, uh, Street and Fraser Highway intersection. Uh, and I believe the outstanding items will continue through the process, whether it's, uh, through the design a- and budget and, or, um, MOT approval as well. Thank you. All right. Call to question on that referral. That carries unanimously. Now we'll carry on to reports to council. Item E1, 16th Avenue Corridor Intersection Study. That has been deferred, so it's back on the floor. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, call to question on E1. That carries unanimously. I'm gonna move deferral of item E2 to November 16th, seconded by Councillor Rent. Is there any discussion on deferral? Councillor Richter. Yeah. Why are we... Well, I mean, clearly we're deferring it [laughs] to the next meeting, which will be the new council, but, um, why do we need to defer this again? No, I think it's appropriate for the, probably the next council to take up such an important document. Okay. All right. So to that, call to question on deferral. That carries, Councillor Richter opposed. Item E3, Acceptable Use of AI Policy. I'll move the recommendation, seconded by Councillor Rent. Is there any discussion on E3? Councillor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. It is kind of a clarification question through yourself to staff. Uh, in the report where it itemizes when the use of AI is permitted, and it highlights in the course of township business, does that apply to members of council, or is that staff? Through Your Worship to Councillor Pratt, that would, uh, apply to members of council. So members of council in the course of township business, so whether they're representing the township at an event or whether they're sitting at this table, is the use of AI at this table guided by this policy if it was approved today? Uh, through Your Worship to Councillor Pratt, so the, uh, policy itself would apply to elected officials that are conducting township business, and, uh, being at the, in the council chambers, that would be considered conducting the, uh, township business. Okay. Thank you very muchYeah, thank you. Um, I just wanted to, um, thank staff, uh, for bringing this policy forward. Um, I attended a session at UBCM talking about, um, the use of AI in the municipal context. Um, some representatives from the city of Vancouver, uh, spoke on this. Um, and how quickly we can lose our, our proprietary information, um, through the in- um, incorrect use of AI. Um, just simple inquiries made, um, not through the correct channels. So I'm really glad to see this, um, great initiative by staff. Thank you for bringing this forward. Yeah, how does this get monitored? Who, who, who will determine, um, yeah, the, how it's being used and, or not being used properly? Uh, through your worship to Councilor Kunz, so in, in the event, uh, when an elected official, staff member is using AI, the intent would be that they seek authorize, uh, authorization to use AI. That would either flow through myself or the director of, uh, information and technology. Uh, so we do rely on, um, the individuals to disclose their use of AI and go through the process, and be compliant with the council policy if it is endorsed by council. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Richter? Uh, yeah. Just to follow up on a question that Councilor Pratchist raised. Uh, the policy will of course apply to councilors, but I'm just wondering, are councilors required to use AI? At the award- 'Cause some of us have an al- an allergy to technology. At the awardship to Councilor Richter, there, there is no requirement to use AI or artificial intelligence. It's just in the event it is being used for township businesses, there's a policy that would now, uh, essentially provide, uh, a framework of how to use AI and, uh, uh, the appropriate disclosures and, um, ensuring compliance with any legislation or policies. Okay. So we don't have to use it, but if we do, we need to get it checked. That, that's correct. Okay. Second question: What's the anticipated cost of this for software upgrades? At your worship to Councilor Richter, with respect to this council policy, it's just implementation, so that would be just staff, um, resource and time, and currently IT is already going through separate, um, has the budget, and if there's any budget requests required we'll do it during the 2027 budget process for, um, Copilot Premium, upgrading some of the gov AI, and other, um, u- fr- government friendly artificial intelligence software pro- programming. Okay. So I can see there will likely be some software costs. Probably the bigger question, are there gonna be related hardware costs as well? 'Cause that's where the real money is. Uh, the hardware costs are if we build it in-house, but what we're doing is we're subscribing to hosted services, so there's no anticipated hardware costs. Great. Thank you. Let's, you know, discuss and call the question on E3. That carries unanimously. Item E4, residential interim on-site stormwater detention servicing within a portion of the Williams Neighborhood Plan. I'll move it. Seconded by Councilor Pratt. Any discussion on E4? Councilor Richter? Yeah. I just had a question, actually, a clarification to staff on this. Um, I just have to get to my report here. On page three it mentions that a surface facility in the form of a detention pond shall be provided to accommodate. Does that mean that all these pilot areas have to have above ground, or are below ground options also possible? It could be decommissioned when the real detention pond gets put in place up there. To your worship, to Councilor Richter, so the, it's a very limited pilot program that's intended to only cover the eligible lands. The eligible lands are identified in attachment A, so that's, uh, north, we'd characterize it as northern Williams Neighborhood Plan north of 80th. So there's certain criterias, uh, that need to be met in order for it to, for them to be eligible. One of the criterias indicated, as you have mentioned, is surface facilities in the form of a detention pond. Essentially, those will be provided to accommodate, uh, interim stormwater. It'd be only interim in measure. Uh, and then once the, uh, final, um, detention pond is, uh, constructed, then those, um, that surface facility then can be essentially, uh, as you kind of articulated, decommissioned or, uh, then that would potentially be further developable land that can be, uh, developed. Okay. But I was just wondering, like, do they have to have it, like, above ground or can it be below ground? Like a cistern of something? To your worship, to Councilor Richter, I believe the intent, since it's interim, it, uh, therefore we would prefer the surface facility. But, uh, um, Mr. Richardson can maybe speak more on the technical ba- uh, rationale f- for that as well. Uh, thank you. Th- uh, through Mr. Kuner, supplement his comments, I would, uh, concur with Mr. Kuner. Surface facility is indicated, um, to provide for a number of items. One, it's more easily removable. In terms of, of the specifics of it, a tank facility would have more investment involved, likely have a longer timeframe. These are meant to be interim in their nature. Also, a surface facility is easier to maintain. Um- And would provide for emergency spillway measures which were also included here. So for those items, the surface facility is the item, uh, of eligibility. Okay. But is that something that, uh, if a proponent has a different idea, they can discuss with staff? It is not a bylaw per se, it's a policy right now, or a pilot project. Uh, through Your Worship to Councilor Richter, the el- as you noted, correct, it's a, it's a pilot program as directed by council, and staff's recommendation is to endorse the eligibility criteria. Okay. And based on the factors mentioned, the surface facility is the recommended approach. Okay. Thank you. Uh, thank you, Your Worship. Two questions through yourself to staff just following up on the surface facility conversation. On larger construction sites, you'll see a s- a ESC pond, um, the surface facilities that are anticipated being used for stormwater retention. W- is there much difference in terms of the landscaping requirements or the condition that these ponds are kept in, seeing as it could be some time before these surface facilities are decommissioned and replaced with, with homes in their final state? Uh, through you, Your Worship to Councilor Pratt. Um, so as outlined in the criteria, all of our development applications require servicing agreements. So eligibility criteria require about a number of different items are, uh, through our servicing agreement, uh, security by RC for their, uh, location, no build on that facility until the ultimate facility is available, uh, for their maintenance, for the requirement for a professional engineer to, uh, visit the site yearly, uh, make sure that it's functioning correctly. Also, um, emergency spillway measures as well. So it's a bunch of different items identified in the eligibil- eligibility criteria as you've noted, sort of safer those items should it last, um, in a nearer timeframe versus an interim timeframe. Items there are also trying to encourage the proponent to fulfill those items and decommission those items versus them being a longer term facility, which is why it's identified as a pilot interim project, Your Worship. Right. So I guess to follow up on that, if I'm thinking of one pond in particular f- for a condo site right now, the condition of the pond itself is pr- is very clearly temporary. You know, there's construction materials around it and everything like that. So for these pilot ponds f- that are c- used for stormwater retention, is there gonna be a bit higher of a standard of care and maintenance for simply the residents who live around the pond, if it's gonna be some time medium term before the eventual pond? Because my, my subsequent question after this is in relation to a, a clause here in the report stating that we anticipate it being some time before the, the ultimate pond is complete. Uh, through you, Your Worship to Councilor Pratt. So the, uh, the interim pilot program would only pertain to applications that are currently being permitted. They would have associated landscape plans. So as part of that, we would look for what the ultimate landscape plan would pr- be for the site, as well as part of that service agreement, what the interim, um, items would be around that. So the item's about fencing for safety concerns, inflows, outlets, emergency spillways, um, and those types of items on the supervision of, one, the project landscape architect, and two, the design and maintenance of an engineer, Your Worship. Okay. I appreciate that gives me some comfort. Thank you. Uh, the last question I had in relation to this is in the summary of the background of the report, it talks about the application, uh, project number 08250098. Uh, it was granted third reading actually July 26th, 2021, so five years almost to the day. And then it goes on to, uh, mention subsequently other agreements that were, uh, agreed to between the proponent and the township, and then the, the background kind of concludes by saying, "As such, construction of the ultimate community stormwater fa- detention facility is not anticipated in the near term." Can staff comment why in, in their sort of assessment we're not anticipating that stormwater detention pond being completed in the near term? Uh, through you, Your Worship to Councilor Pratt. A number of items there. So there's some, as staff understand it, some ownership items in relation to that, uh, that piece. Uh, secondly, as outlined in the report also, uh, since that timeframe has lapsed or has progressed, there'd be some related, uh, construction costs and other considerations that might, uh, pertain, and the proponent may wish to update those items in relation to the DCC front-enders and the development works agreement. So those items would also take, if they were to be elected to proceed, in terms of cost recovery from the proponent, they would take their natural course, and, uh, given council's current schedule and, uh, identification from the proponent, um, with relation to that, would take us in easily probably into next year, Your Worship. Okay. Thank you very much. Seeing no other discussion, I'll call the question on E4. That carries unanimously. Item E5, Water L- Local Area Service, 55A Avenue, 2048 Block. I'm gonna just direct the council's attention, there's three resolutions, one, two, and three. I'm only moving number one and not moving number two and three. Is there a second for that? Second. Seconded by Councilor Ferguson. Is there any discussion on E5, resolution number one? Councilor Richter. Uh, just curious, why are, are, are the other two just not gonna be moved, or do, are we dividing this? Yeah, I would suggest that we not move the other two. Okay. Is there a particular reason why? I think we could, uh, wait to see if the local area petition is successful, and then look at how to pay for it. Oh, so it'll come back down the road then. We can consider that, yeahOkay. Thank you. All right, seeing no other discussion, call the question on E5, number one. That carries unanimously. Item E6, Heritage Legacy Fund grant applications. Anybody wish to move that? Moved by Councillor Pratt, seconded by Councillor Bailey. Is there any discussion on E6? Seeing none, call the question on E6. That carries unanimously. Item E7, Build Community Strong Fund. I'll move it. Seconded by Councillor Rint. Any discussion on E7? Seeing none, call the question on E7. Carries unanimously. Item E8, potential 2272 Street active transportation improvements. Moved by Councillor Rint, seconded by Councillor Ferguson. Councillor Richter. Yes. I'm just wondering what the cost is going to be. Do we have a total cost of this? Your Worship, through Councillor Richter, the completed detailed design, uh, of 272, uh, Street active transportation, I believe it's estimated about 300, uh, $300,000. That's 300,000. Okay, thank you. And we have the money to pay for it, obviously. Which accounts are coming from? We'd be referring it to the budget process. Okay. Seeing no discussion, I'll call the question on E8. Carries unanimously. Closing gaps in Willoughby's multi-use path network. Moved by Councillor Pratt, seconded by Councillor Rint. Councillor Pratt. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. I'm excited to see this back on the table. However, I will have a referral motion, uh, if there's no other speakers. Oh, please, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, Your Worship. So my referral motion is that the item be referred back to staff to work directly with Hub Cycling Langley on updating their maps included in Report 2699 to review the MUP network, and to outline for council consideration the method by which staff will pursue ongoing consultation with the community. Seconded by Councillor Rint. Any discussion on that? Wish to speak to that? Are you good? No, I'm okay. To Your Worship, could we just have that repeated? We... The clerk had missed that. Refer back to staff to work directly with Hub Cycling Langley on updating the maps included in Report 26-99 to review the MUP network, and to outline for council consideration the method by which staff will pursue ongoing consultation with the community. Any other discussion on that referral of E9? Seeing none, call the question on that referral. That carries unanimously. Item E10, temporary use permit application number 0021. Does anybody wish to move that? I'll move it. Is there a seconder? Seconded by Councillor Bailey. Yep, go ahead. Oh, there's some... Any discussion on that? Councillor Richter, go ahead. Um, I was wondering about the trucks that will be eligible to be used under this temporary use permit. Are they going to be trucks from their own business, or is it trucks from other businesses as well? Uh, through Your Worship to Councillor Richter, there's no restriction with respect to the commercial vehicle's ownership, whether it's within the existing business or other businesses. Okay, so the map on page 11 shows actually three separate truck parking areas in there. Does, uh, but only one is sort of highlighted. Is it just that area, uh, or are the other areas gonna be eligible to have trucks parked on them as well as a result of this temporary use permit? Uh, through Your Worship to Councillor Richter, the specific map you're referring to, I believe, um, there's three separate headings, uh, due to the fact it's, uh, the, uh, the road, uh, that is being proposed creates the divide. So they've highlighted that there'll be trucks to the, if I get my directions correct, north of the property, south of it, and at the center, but that's a road dividing that, uh, the, the, the space where the trucks will be parked. So that's hence why there's three separate, uh, headings that show where the trucks, uh, will be located. Yeah, okay. So I guess what's concerning me about this, I think it needs public input because if anybody can park their trucks in there, how many trucks are we talking about? It looks like a good third of that property. Through Your Worship to Councillor Richter, uh, I believe, w- were you seeking that, uh, the amount of trucks being parked, or that, uh, is there an opportunity to do a public input opportunity? Well, I think the neighbors need a public input opportunity. Uh, through Your Worship to Councillor Richter, then we'd just need a referral back to staff... Or sorry, direction, uh, specifically to do a, um, public input opportunity with respect to this temporary use permit application. Well, I'd like to make that referralSpeakers, go ahead I'll refer it back to staff for a public input opportunity on this All right, is there a second to that? Second. Seconded by Councillor Martins. Make sure that's clear. All right, any discussion on that, Councillor Ferguson? Well, no, I just think you've got, uh, uh, essentially a five-acre parcel there that is gonna have trucks on it, and it looks like it could be anybody's trucks. So I think the neighbors need to have a word or two about that. Okay. Just want to be clear, you're making a referral back to staff for a public input opportunity of the truck parking? Yeah. On the other. Okay. Councillor Pratt, go ahead. Yeah, thank you, uh, Your Worship. I, I, I'm inclined to support the public input opportunity simply because I'd be curious to know what the opinion, uh, of family members who potentially have people who are currently interred there at the cemetery would be. Uh, I mean, in terms of neighbors, you've got the transfer station to the north, and a truck park to the south and to the east, and Dale Ball... No, it's not Dale Ball, sorry. It's Philip Jackman Park to the west. So, uh, for me, the public input opportunity would probably more cover off the, the families who are affected at the cemetery, and that's what I look forward to hearing about. Seeing no other discussion, I'll call the question on that referral. The referral carries. Councillor Ferguson, Councillor Ren- uh, Mayor Woodward opposed. All right, so move on to bylaws for first and second reading official community plan amendment rezoning application number Bylaw 62276228. I wonder if we could get another break? Can you go 20 more minutes, or would you like that, no? We appreciate. Okay. We do one more, and then we'll call a recess. Okay, so Councillor Bailey, no problem. Uh, so F1, I'll move it. Is there a seconder to F1? Seconded by Councillor Ren. Is there any discussion on F1? Councillor Martins. Thank you. Um, I know you said just one more, but my question is the same for both F1 and F2, if that's all right. Um, in the staff report, on page, uh, four, um, question to staff, uh, through the chair. Um, under the background and history section, uh, the second bullet point, it says that, "On April 29th, 2024, a temporary use permit was issued by council to permit the parking of commercial vehicles for a three-year period, subject to eight conditions. Site clearing and commercial vehicle parking activities have commenced prior to completing the temporary use permit conditions." And that same line is used in both reports. Um, so is it okay that they went ahead with their activities before completing the conditions? Or is this, um, something that we should be of concern that, um, they haven't complied with all their conditions before doing a temporary use permit, let alone now applying for a permanent? Um, if I could get some clarification from staff about that, the language of that. Uh, through Your Worship, Council Martins. So there's, as you noted, there's two separate and distinct processes happening here. One is the temporary use permit the council, um, issued in 2024, um, and that's being actively worked on by the proponent. Um, all those conditions, some of those conditions are still in process, landscaping items like that. The proponent has elected to, um, avail themselves of some of the uses that are permitted under that at this stage. Second, distinct from that is the current application which is for the, the plan amendment and rezoning to make the commercial vehicle parking permanent. So some of those items that are conditions of the temporary use permit may also overlap in terms of conditions of the proposed plan amendment and rezoning, but they're separate and distinct, and staff continue to work with the proponent on the fulfillment of those conditions. Okay. So is it, is it appropriate then, um, that we're considering a permanent, um, when we haven't even finished the temporary process, um, uh, I guess that's my question. Um, how, how are we doing this at the same time? Uh, through Your Worship to Council Martins. Uh, as, as noted, they're separate and distinct, separate and distinct items. Um, there are occasion when, uh, proponents come in and they're, um, asking for a use that may be a use that had maybe not been permitted over time due to a zoning bylaw change, or it only had a preexisting use. Um, in this specific instance, um, council has, uh, s- provided for the temporary use permit for that use. Mm-hmm. That is, um, the use has been permitted, so the subject conditions, as outlined, landscaping, for example, has not been completed. However, however, um, they are conditions of that permit, and once again, the, the separate and distinct process is what's before council today. Okay. Thank you. Um, and then my other question, and again, it's the same in both reports. Um, on page seven, uh, under the tree protection and replacement, um, category, the comment under that graph says, "Staff note that premature tree removal occurred on the subject site and pursuant to Subdivision and Servicing Bylaw 5382, Schedule one, Tree Protection Section 5.1, inconsistent with past practice, funds toward replacement tree planting is a development prerequisite." Um, I guess, again, I would appreciate if I can, through the chair to staff, some clarification on... This sounds like, um, perhaps this was a, a wrongdoing, but I'm not sure. The, the, it s- it uses the term premature tree removal. Um, if you could perhaps, um, elaborate on those, that section.Uh, through your Worship, uh, to, to Councilor Martins. So as previously mentioned, as part of the temporary use permit conditions was finalization of landscape plans, which may involve in certain occasions, uh, what trees on the site need to be removed or altered or supplemented in terms of that. Staff note that prior to the finalization of those, those drawings, there was some tree removal there. The township subdivision development servicing by-law has a requirement of staff to advise council of such an occurrence. So that's what staff's doing in terms of the report here. Uh, past practice, um, with respect, uh, to this item, I'm thinking of some items, say, in the Willoughby area, near the Culvert Exchange. We've had apartment buildings there that have, uh, gone ahead and done some roadworks that have, um, uh, impacted some trees, uh, prior to those, uh, finalization of those tree management plans being done. Um, so we bring this forward. Typically, the proponent then will, uh, work with staff and provide, um, some, uh, monetary compensation for that. Um, typically in a ratio, say, three to one or some item in, in, in that range. So that's what the, uh, item there in the staff report is referencing. Okay. So, um, there isn't, um, actual enforcement done, it's just absorbed in paying it forward. Is that what I'm understanding? Uh, through Your Worship, uh, specifically, there is enforcement. So when staff are, uh, made aware of an item or if they're going about their, the course of their business and other items that they recognize that's happening, then we will, uh, contact the proponents, uh, qualified professionals responsible for that, indicate to them that they're not, either one, in line with the by-law, or two, their permit or the process that they've, um, that they're under- undergoing with the township with respect to that item. Uh, in such a case, so where those trees have already been impacted, as I mentioned previously, the by-law outlines that we advise council and, um, work with the proponent on appropriate compensation measures for that item. Okay, thank you. So, um, that, that does concern me a little bit. Um, but it sounds like there is, um, potential remedy, um, as you said. So I appreciate you, um, answering those questions. Councillor Rickter? Yeah. Well, I appreciate Councilor Martins raising them, because certainly if there were original conditions set for the temporary use permit that were never fulfilled, uh, not to mention the premature tree removal, I think this should be referred to, um, or deferred until the original conditions of the temporary use permit are met. So, uh, I'll defer the floor at this point, Mr. Mayor, but I'd like to come back and put that motion to defer this until the temporary use permit conditions are met. Do I have another speaker? Councilor Bailey? Yeah, I'm a little confused on this one. I'm looking at significant trees on site is zero, and then you're talking about, uh, premature tree removal. So how does that work if they... So obviously, no significant trees were removed. So can I get some information on what trees, what size of trees in that, that were removed? Through you, Worship, Councilor Bailey, I don't have the information on the exact size of trees that were there. Um, as mentioned previously, the, there's two separate and distinct processes here. So the rezoning report for the council, the planning amendment and rezoning re- report in front of council now will reflect the updated information we have at the time of the application current, whereas the temporary use permit issued in 2024 would've included that tree information in there. Um, so, um, the exact size, caliper, and species of trees, I don't have that at hand currently. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Rickter, go ahead. Yes. I move deferral of this by-law until all the conditions for the temporary use permit are met. All right. Is there a seconder of that? Second. So I'm gonna rule that out of order. Ugh, then I challenge the chair. Yeah. I'm gonna rule that out of order on the basis that, as, that Mr. Richardson identified, there are two separate processes, so to link them together to meet the conditions of one, I don't see how that can be a condition of another. Ms. Bower, the chair's been challenged, so if you could please, uh, conduct the challenge. Okay. So I will open the vote, and if you vote in affirmative, you are supporting the chair. If you vote in the negative, you believe the chair is in error and you didn't, you're, you're not supporting him. You understand? Good. Okay, so the chair is sustained with Councilor Kunz, Councilor Martins, and Councilor Rickter opposed. Is there any other discussion on F1? Nope, seeing none, I'll call the question on F1. Check one.I'm sorry. Could you please revote? I just didn't have you back in before you voted. Yes, please. The, the challenge to the chair was completed. Unfortunately, the mayor called the motion before I was able to get back in the, in the vote. So if we could re-- please redo F1. No, we, we, we completed that one, so now it's just whether you're supporting the original motion or not. Yes.All right, we'll get back underway here. Item F2, official community plan amendment rezoning application number 100311, bylaw number 62296230. Motion to move that. Moved by Councilor Ferguson, seconded by Councilor Pratt. Is there any discussion on F2? All right, seeing none, call to question on F2. That carries with Councilor Martins, Councilor Richter opposed. Bylaws for first, second, and third reading G1, rezoning application number 100781, bylaw number 6251. I'll move it, seconded by Councilor Rint. Is there any discussion on G1? Seeing none, call to question on G1. Yeah, carries unanimously. G2, rezoning application number 100751, bylaw number 6221. Moved by Councilor Rint, seconded by Councilor Bailey. Is there any discussion on G2? Councilor Richter? Yes. Um, on this particular application, there's 48 significant trees on page six, none of which will be retained, but there will be 92 replacement tree, uh, replacement trees. Um, and I'm just thinking, I know this is a, an SMU application, but there must be a way to retain more trees. Thank you. Councilor Rich? Yeah. [clears throat] I guess for me, I'm, I'm looking at this, and I'll, I'll be supporting it, but, um, uh, probably one of the first SMUs we've seen, and this is going to be right beside, um, the Campbell, uh, Industrial Park on 32nd Avenue. It just doesn't seem to be a really great location. But I guess that's not for us to decide. But, um, anyway.I just wanted to make those comments. Alright, seeing no discussion, I call the question on G2. Carries, Councillor Richter opposed. Bylaws for final adoption I1, Metro West Intermunicipal Business License Bylaw and Agreement Bylaw, bylaw number 6236, 6237. I'll move it, seconded by Councillor Rint. Any discussion on I1? Seeing none, call the question on I1. That carries unanimously. I2, proposed green building permit rebate program increases, bylaw number 6238, 6239. I'll move it, seconded by Councillor Rint. Any discussion on I2? Seeing none, call the question on I2. Carries unanimously. I3, 2026 update to the subdivision and development servicing bylaw, bylaw number 6211, 6225. Moved by Councillor Rint, seconded by Councillor Ferguson. Any discussion on I3? Seeing none, call the question on I3. That carries, Councillor Richter opposed. I4, rezoning application number 100771. Moved by Councillor Rint, seconded by myself. Is there any discussion on I4? Seeing none, call the question on I4. That carries unanimously. I5, rezoning application number 100783, bylaw number 6129. Moved by Councillor Rint, seconded by Councillor Bailey. Councillor Richter. Yeah, I'm just wondering about, um, the natural park, uh, the Fernridge Nature Park that's down on this application. And, uh, I know that it's not complete yet, but I'm just wondering if we are going to be able to complete it, when? And do we need a motion to add funding to the 2027 to 2031 budget for consideration by the next council? So, I guess my question to staff is, will there be funding to complete this park coming through in the next budget process? Uh, Your Worship, to Councillor Richter, this specific bylaw for final adoption is with respect to the lands that do not include that, uh, Fernridge Nature Park. But in a- in any event, and my recollection is that that, uh, nature park has already been endorsed, um, and approved, and it's been referred to the 2027 budget process. Okay. Thank you. Seeing no other discussion, I'll call the question on I5 rezoning bylaw final adoption. Carries unanimously. I'll move adoption of development permit number 101490, seconded by Councillor Ferguson. Any discussion on development permit? Seeing none, call the question on the development permit for I5. That carries unanimously. I6, official community plan amendment rezoning application number 100303, bylaw number 6135, 6136. I'll move it, seconded by Councillor Pratt. Any discussion on I6? Seeing none, call the question on I6. Carries unanimously. I7, rezoning application number 100790, bylaw number 6246. Moved by Councillor Rint, seconded by Councillor Bailey. Any discussion on I7? Seeing none, call the question on I7. Carries unanimously. I8, official community plan amendment rezoning application number 100291, bylaw number 60906091. Moved by Councillor Rint, seconded by Councillor Ferguson. Any discussion on I8? Seeing none, call the question on I8. That carries unanimously. Does anybody wish to make a council report? Councillor Martins, go ahead. Thank you. Um, yeah. Uh, so, um, four years ago, at our inaugural council meeting, I shared Theodore Roosevelt's words from The Man in the Arena. His reminder that it is not the critic who counts spoke to the responsibility of public service, the willingness to step into the arena, make difficult decisions, accept criticism, learn, and keep moving forward in service to others. As this council term comes to a close, those words mean even more to me than they did on that first day. Serving as a township of Langley councillor has been one of the greatest honors of my life. More than anything, these past four years have left me with a deep sense of gratitude. Public service has always been at the heart of my adult working life, and serving on council allowed me to continue that commitment to the community I love. Along the way, I was reminded that good local government begins with listening, treating people with respect, and building trust. Respect for taxpayers, respect for one another, and respect for the responsibility we've been given are values that have guided every decision I have made. When I reflect on this term, I won't remember every motion or every agenda, I'll remember the people. Our veterans, volunteers, first responders, local businesses, young people- Seniors, community organizations, and the countless conversations with residents that reminded me why local government matters. I've also come away with an even greater appreciation for the many unsung heroes who serve our community every day. Township staff, firefighters, RCMP members, public works crews, educators, healthcare professionals, volunteers, and so many others who quietly make the township of Langley the incredible place we call home. They deserve our deepest respect and gratitude. To everyone who placed their trust in me over these past four years, thank you. Representing you has been a privilege that I never took for granted. Whether we agreed on every issue or not, I always tried to listen, learn, and serve with integrity and respect. This experience has reminded me that leadership isn't about having all the answers, it's about showing up, doing the work, being accountable, treating people with dignity, and leaving your community a little better than you found it. As I close this chapter, I find myself back where I began, with Roosevelt's reminder that, "The credit belongs to the one who is actually in the arena." Those words challenged me at the beginning of this journey, and they continue to inspire me today. I certainly wasn't perfect. Like anyone who chooses to serve, I faced challenges, made difficult decisions, celebrated successes, and learned many lessons. But every day, I did my very best to serve this community with integrity, respect, and gratitude. Thank you to my council colleagues and to township staff for your dedication to this remarkable community. Most of all, thank you to the residents of the township of Langley for giving me the extraordinary privilege of serving as your counselor. Finally, to the two people who have shared this journey with me from beginning to end, my family, Matthew and Abigail, thank you. As your mom, I know this role asked a great deal of you as well. You sacrificed family time, shared me with this community, and supported me through every challenge with love, patience, and strength. I hope you know that every day I tried to serve this community in a way that would make you proud. It's been one of the greatest honors of my life. Thank you. Ms. Ricky. Yes. I'd just like to, um, thank Dr. Christine Bishop, who is a longtime member of our community down in the Brookswood-Fernridge area. And not only that, but she's a very passionate volunteer with stewardship groups, uh, like the, the Little Campbell River shed, uh, River Shed Group. And she very kindly gave me a tour along with some others, uh, of the Fernridge Nature Park that is down beside, sort of beside and behind the new, uh, the new fire hall in Brookswood. And I just wanna say, it's going to be a real gem for this community. It's, um, such an incredible and diverse area for species and birds. Uh, and it was... I, I mean, I can see what it's gonna look like once it opens for the public to use, and I hope that day comes sooner as opposed to later. So I was very thankful to hear that, uh, we're gonna be talking about putting money into finishing that park in the 2027 budget. Thank you. Yes, please. [clears throat] Yeah. I would concur on the Christine, uh, Bishop and the Campbell Red- Campbell Watershed Society. I also wanna thank Amanda from LEPS. Um, she hosted a bunch of us, uh, for the, the Langley Eats Local dinner. Um, I also attended the jazz festival on the weekend, and that was really great to see [clears throat] all the volunteers. Man, there was a lot of volunteers there that pulled that off. Um, and I, and I can't forget, um, I attended the opening of the fire hall and, um, that was already a couple of weeks ago, but um, it looks really great and I'm happy to have supported that. Um, and I just do have a few words, um, [clears throat] just reflecting on the last four years. So, um, it's hard to believe we've come to the end of another four-year term. I can still remember walking into the first meeting of this term wondering what the next four years would bring. Then somewhere around the second meeting, I remember thinking, "Wow, this is gonna be buckets of fun." Now, I could spend the next couple of minutes talking about some of the challenges, but I think those have been well-documented. Instead, I'd rather reflect on why I came here in the first place, and why four years later I'm still grateful for the opportunity to serve. Serving as an independent counselor this term, I knew I didn't have the influence to move every issue forward. But I learned that making a difference isn't measured only by votes around the council table. Some of the most meaningful work happens quietly behind the scenes. While our role as counselors is to make policy and vote on issues that shape our community, the best part of this job is helping people. Taking a phone call from someone who's frustrated, helping them navigate a problem, answering a question, or sometimes just listening. There are rewarding days, and there are certainly difficult ones. Um, through it all, I try to stay true to the values that brought me here in the first place. Listen, be prepared, treat people with respect, and do the best job I can for the people who place their trust in me. So I'd like to thank our township staff. Much of the work you do happens behind the scenes and often goes unnoticed. Thank you for your professionalism, your dedication, and for everything you do to serve our community. And finally, to the residents of the township of Langley, thank you to everyone who supported me, challenged me, and shared your thoughts over the past four years. Thank you for the comm- uh, thank you for the opportunity to serve. It truly is one of the greatest honors of my life. Yes, please. Yeah. I, uh, [clears throat]I'm, uh, very proud of what, uh, what occurred in this last, uh, couple weeks here, especially with the o- opening of Hall 5. Uh, that hall, uh, has been at the center of what I've been trying to a- uh, achieve in, in the last four years. And, uh, seeing it come, uh, come in service, uh, I am positive that it will not only help people in the immediate area like it did within a couple hours with a very major MVI on 16th Avenue with a quicker, much quicker response, but with the input of the firefighters and everyone involved, uh, I know it's gonna save firefighters' lives. It'll reduce cancers, it'll reduce heart, right down to the, uh, the reduction of CIS, critical incident stress, uh, the way that hall was designed. Also, the burn camp kickoff, uh, I've attended numerous ones over my career, um, being on the bur- uh, board of directors for the burn, burn fund, and I've gotta say, uh, Local 4550, uh, knocked it out of the park. They had an incredible one. Uh, the U15 fastball, uh, tournament that went on at, uh, Noel Booth, the Aldergrove Fair, uh, Jazz Festival, and the LEPS dinner was excellent. But I wanna, I wanna address something that, that has, I mean, gnawed away and, and, and, and I wanna address this issue of debt. And I, I have a, a great concern with the debt, but I look at the debt of delay. How much does it cost to not deal with things and to do the capital building that we've done? And I look at the delay that affected 40th Avenue, in that we had to fix it properly, the delay of waiting lists for soccer, lacrosse, fastball, pickleball, and et cetera. I look at the delay that was occurring when we first got on, uh, council with, uh, labor contracts that were three years in advance, and then we fixed those very quickly. The d- the, uh, the delay of not having a fire hall built in 20 years. The delay of having to s- uh, around $6 million of renovations that had to go into Hall 3, 4, and 6 because those renovations were delayed. Our s- RCMP's attachment needed about $4 million to fix that place up because it had been ignored for so long. 208th, I think, uh, what you see there now speaks to it. But the shortage of parkland that was also put on hold, and now with us expanding the Fernridge Nature Park from about 45 acres to 80 acres, I am incredibly proud of being a- associated with that. And I also look at, at how these debts of delay are not going to go on, because at the start of this, this term, we said we were going to do things, and we did them. And very rarely do you now hear that, uh, politicians do what they say. So I've gotta say I am extremely proud of the accomplishments of this, uh, council, uh, over the last four years, and I look forward, hopefully, to another four years of, uh, finishing, uh, what we started. Thank you. Councillor Pratt. Thank you, Your Worship. I'd be remiss if I didn't take a couple moments and, uh, just recognize that according to, uh, research, it's been 1,358 days since our inaugural council meeting, uh, of this term, and I think township staff have had to deal with three to four times that number of questions from me over the course of the term on different items and different reports and different strategies. And so I just wanna take the chance and take the time to thank, uh, all of our staff for everything that they've done over the last four years to make it possible that, uh, those of us here who sit at this table and have the honor to sit at this table have been able to move forward with a variety of different items, whether they're big or small. And as somebody who was elected as an independent and who was elected, uh, as the youngest councilor, it's been, uh, a tremendous learning experience every single one of those 1,358 days. It's been, quite frankly, the honor of my life to be able to sit on the council of my hometown. Uh, the township of Langley was an amazing place to grow up in, whether it was learning how to play soccer at the gravel field at Noel Booth, which I still have scars for, and I'm a little bit, uh, jealous that kids moving forward will not be learning how to play soccer on a gravel field at Noel Booth, or whether it's the expanded parks. Whatever it is, it's been my mission every single day to be able to leave this place better than we found it, and so that when my kids are growing up here, they have even more opportunities to enjoy and to succeed and to learn how to play sports or how to enjoy nature or to be whoever they wanna be. So I wanna thank every single person here on council for the experience of the last four years. And again, I wanna thank staff and, of course, uh, the people of the township of Langley. So thank you so much for the opportunity to be, uh, able to represent my community in such an amazing way. Councillor Ferguson. Uh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, first of all, announcement that, uh, on behalf of the Royal Canadian Legion, they celebrated their 100th anniversary on, uh, on July the 17th, 2026, from 1926 to 2026. I am wearing the Legion tie today, and I got my Legion button on. I'm a member of the Aldergrove Legion. And they celebrate, celebrated that day with, with a remembrance celebration, entertainment, and some fellowship. Um, back to council. I always carry my handbook. It's called Making a Difference: Cuff's Guide to Municipal Governments and Leadership. And the one thing is he always indicated when you're working in a challenge, either positive or negative, in a relationship, uh, at council, you always wanna do the very, very best you can. In my situation, it's been more of a bittersweet for me because, uh, in November 2022nd, um, 2020... our house burned down. And despite that challenge, I moved forward with the help of this council, the mayor, and the staff, uh, to help me get through that ordeal, and appreciate the work done by the firefighters and staff. Now, back to building and making a relationship and a difference in the township of Langley amongst other communities, we work on a tripartite situation where we work with council, ourselves, staff, and I have the utmost respect for staff and the work they do, and the public, of course, the residents. And when these three things are working together, we build quality communities. And I think making a difference for roads to 08 to 80th and other ro- road improvements, and I have to compliment the... I know it's a mess right now, the government of British Columbia for building the highway number one, which when it's finished, it'll be great, and it'll be long, long overdue with their overpasses as well. Making a difference for parks, accessible parks, BMX parks, regional parks, including new, two new regional parks coming to the township of Langley, hundreds of acres. Making a difference for recreation, soccer, hockey, lacrosse, ball hockey, gymnastics, et cetera, moving forward in the future. Making a difference for protection. Firefighters. We built a new fire hall, we've introduced more f- more f- firefighters, and we're moving together for the future for firefighting. Police. Police officers. We put a new gym in the new building there. They're happy for that. And also making a difference for the future. Working with our school district, building new schools, 25-plus acres between a middle school and a high school. It's unheard of in the region. We are moving forward and building a livable community where we are a very good community, and I'm proud of it. I'm proud of the work this council has done this term. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. All right. Thank you. Does anybody have a regional report to make? Nope. Move on to items M1 through 7. Anybody have any questions on M1 through 7? Councilor Richter. Um, yeah, I had a follow-up or a question on, um, item M4 with regards to the, uh, tree, unauthorized tree removal, and I'm just putting it out here for staff's consideration going forward. Uh, perhaps we need to ensure going forward that there are provisions or opportunities for a preferred language service, uh, in order to get permits, um, completed correctly. And, um, also, I was just wondering if this report will be shared with the, uh, person who made the delegation to us last meeting. Through your worship to Council Richter, the public agendas are live, but the report itself, uh, can be emailed to the, uh, resident or the owner of this property as well. Okay. Thank you very much. And I had one other one with regards to, uh, one of the Agricultural Land Commission decisions from April to June. This deals with pages 17 to 32 on a comp- on a, a property or a company, Henry Drilling. And I'm just wondering if staff could clarify what their interpretation of township's role is going forward on this. Do we have to monitor that all these conditions are met, or is that the responsibility of the ALC to do? Uh, through your worship to Councilor Richter, the ALC has indicated as part of the decision that there's a monitoring and reclaiming, uh, plan required. So these are ALC requirements, so they're the responsible body. Okay. So ALC is responsible for it. Okay. And my last question has to deal with number seven on the Seniors Advisory Committee. I was, uh, quite impressed with the seniors survey, uh, that was attached to this item, pages 6 to 11. I'm just wondering, is TOL gonna run this, um, survey, and if yes, when, and what kind of sample size are we looking to achieve? Uh, through your worship to Councilor Richter, I don't believe there's specific direction at this time, uh, with respect to a township-wide survey. Okay. Uh- And, and I believe it's still a work in progress, so it- It's still a work in progress, so does that mean it's gonna go back to the committee for some decisions and recommendations to council? I, I believe they're still working at a committee level, a committee level, and then we would look at this in the fall 2026. Okay, 'cause I think this is a very good, uh, idea to have a senior survey. Thank you. Okay. Seeing nothing else, move on. Councilor Rint, go ahead. Oh-Yes, I want to move 01 as written. I think it, uh, speaks for itself. All right. I'll second it. Yep. Councilor Pratt seconded that motion, yeah? Any discussion on 01? Councilor Richter. Well, I'd just like to make an observation, and, uh, I actually think that township has been doing a lot of what this motion has in the whereases for, well, at least since 20 or the year 2000, uh, with regards to boulevards, et cetera. So I'm not thinking this motion is particularly needed at this point in time. I think staff are already doing it. Thank you. All right, seeing no discussion, call to question. Carries, Councilor Richter opposed. Councilor Rent, 02. Yep. Moving 02 as written. It speaks for itself. All right. Well... Any discussion on 02? Councilor Richter? Again, I'm, I'm going to make an observation more than anything else. Uh, I just find that this is going to be something the next council will have to deal with, and I'm concerned that it would contradict some of the things that this council's already done. For example, we banned dogs on playing fields because of the potential for contact with dog feces. Well, if we've got animal feces everywhere, does that create a risk and a liability, too? So again, I believe this should be a decision of the next council, not this one. So I'm not supporting it. Thank you. Yeah. Mr. Kear, can you confirm, maybe with staff, what year was the, the policy of no dogs on sports fields brought in? I believe it was last year, or was it this... I have to double-check with staff. No, I think it's... Maybe, maybe confer. It's been, it's longstanding policy for many, many years. I, I believe we amended the bylaw, and I, I believe the discussion came up last year, but the, the bylaw itself, that specific clause was in there for several years. I believe staff was just reviewing it now. So again, I just gotta reiterate, everyone's gotta be very careful of these statements that are made as if they're facts. Um, they're not facts. Okay, so I'm gonna call to question on 02. That carries, Councilor Richter opposed. Is there any other business? So I just wanna confirm again, is there any other business? Councilor Kunst. Yeah. Um, I know that in the, our items distributed, there's a few, um, people who are, um, talking about their annual flat utilities, and it seems like there's some confusion around where they're supposed to pay those. Do we have any... 'Cause I know it's not just here in, in this items distributed. I've kinda seen a little online, and I've actually had someone reach out to me as well. Um, is it just because we switched over, that maybe their utility payment went to their property taxes when they made it online? That could be the case, at which time if they, uh, reach out to our staff, they do move them. They will go through them all and move them. They just probably haven't gotten to them yet. Okay. And do we know, do we, are we getting a lot of those kind of, um- We always get those. Do we? Oh, okay. [laughs] Just seems like we're getting a little bit more now, um, just because of the different accounts, so. Okay, that's all. Thanks. All right, seeing no other business, carry on. Does anybody have any items for closed? Councilor Richter? Yes, I'd like to add a l- Councilor Kunst? Yeah, I have a legal item as well. Councilor Bailie? Yeah, labor relations. All right, Ms. Bower, that's those three items, plus I have four legal items to add as well. Let's get a motion to move resolving the special close closed as amended. Moved by Councilor Bailie, seconded by Councilor Pratt. All those in favor? Opposed? And that's carried. Get a motion to terminate? Terminate. Moved by Councilor Pratt, seconded by Councilor Bailie. Whoa. All those in favor of post carried. I just wanna remind the audience, maybe don't turn off the stream just yet. This is actually not the last council meeting. There's a council meeting at, for a public hearing, for the purposes of a public hearing, at 7:00 PM, and I'll make some statements then. Thank you.