We had a short “Special” council meeting this week. This is a meeting that isn’t on the regular schedule, but we had a few time-sensitive items that came up, and a meeting was convened.

It happens that earlier in the day, a quorum of Council attended the Rainbow Flag Raising at City Hall and Proclamation of Pride Week in New Westminster (New West Pride President Mike Tiney, acting Mayor Lorrie Williams, and the Godfather of New West Pride Vance McFadyen seen above at the ceremony). Then in the afternoon, we had the following less glamorous tasks:

Housekeeping Amendment to Zoning Bylaw to Allow Drug Stores (Pharmacies) in C-CD-3 and C-2L Districts
Almost all commercial-zoned properties in the city permit pharmacies. There are a couple of established commercial properties in Sapperton near RCH that do not, because of historic inconsistencies in how the area was developed. It so happens an existing and successful pharmacy in the area wants to move to a larger property which is one of those few not zoned to permit it.

A logical approach is to do a “housekeeping” amendment, updating the language of the two zones in Sapperton that do not permit pharmacies. That is, effectively, a rezoning, requiring a Public Hearing. Council approved this moving to the Public Hearing stage.

709 and 705 Cumberland Street: Proposed Consolidation and Development Variance Permit Application for Consolidated Parcel
This property near Canada Games Pool had an unprotected heritage house on it, and the owner decided to protect the house with a Heritage Revitalization Agreement in exchange for subdivision, which would allow more density and the building of a second house. Unfortunately, the conditions for protecting the heritage values of the original house were breached, meaning the terms of the HRA were not met. Therefore, the City has come to an agreement with the owner to reconsolidate the lots, effectively taking away the benefits the owner received through the HRA.

The new agreement will not need a Public Hearing, but there is an Opportunity to be Heard on the issue scheduled for the next Council Meeting on August 29. C’mon out and tell us what you think.

Arising form the first agenda item above, we had one Bylaw to address:

Zoning Amendment (Housekeeping) Bylaw No. 7862, 2016
As discussed above, this Bylaw to allow pharmacies in two commercial zoning designations in Sapperton was given first and second reading. There will be a Public Hearing on August 29, 2016. C’mon out and tell us what you think.

And with that, our special early august meeting was adjourned. Enjoy Pride everyone!

July 4th was our last regularly-scheduled Council Meeting of the summer, so we had a pretty lengthy agenda.

We started with a couple of Provincial awards recently won by our Parks and Rec Department, and another won by our Planning Department. I’m super proud of the work our staff is doing, and am happy to see them get some kudos.

Before the full load of announcements, we moved the following items on consent:

Moriguchi Delegation Proposal
Our Japanese Sister City is having a special anniversary in the Fall, and have invited members of our Council to attend as visiting dignitaries. I don’t see good ROI for the City from our Council going on these international trips, but as long as Council members are happy to pay their own travel costs, I see no reason why people shouldn’t go if they want.

2016 School District By-Election – Report of Election Result
Something like 4% of you bothered to take part in the School Board By-Election last month, as Mary Ann Mortensen mysteriously resigned from the board a year and a half into her term. Part of the process is for City staff to officially report out to us on it, because under the Elections Act, the City runs the election and sends the bill to the School District.

Mary Lalji deserves congratulations for eking out a 60-vote win over Dee Beattie.

I got to sit next to Lalji at the NWSS Graduation Ceremony last week, which was my first chance to chat with her. Apparently her first Committee and Board meetings were both epic long ones, so she has been thrown into the deep end right off. I suspect it is tough to join as a rookie mid-term and try to get caught up, but she seemed excited about the opportunity, and her heart is clearly in the right place, so I’m confident she will be a great Trustee.

809 Fourth Avenue: Heritage Alteration Permit
This ongoing project at 8th Street and Fourth Ave has taken a pretty innovative approach to protecting some heritage homes, and has raised some interesting discussion on social media.

The developer bought several lots, has lifted the three heritage homes that face 8th Street, and moved them around to facilitate the building of a multi-level underground parking garage. The garage will support the building of a mid-rise condo complex behind the houses (adjacent to the larger high-rise next door), and the three heritage homes will be restored and converted to strata-ownership duplexes.

This application is simply to alter the already existing and approved Heritage Restoration Plan in order to allow the preservation of all of the original windows, which in turn requires a shifting of the interior layouts of the three preserved houses. Council moved to approve this change.

188 Wood Street: Heritage Alteration Permit
This is another project where a heritage home was preserved as part of a higher-density development in Queensborough. Again, work on the restoration has required a change in approach to some of the siding materials, which is not strictly in compliance with the Heritage Restoration Plan that formed the basis of the agreement. Council moved to approve the alteration of the restoration plan to accommodate the change in siding materials deemed necessary by the restoration expert working on the house.

332 Eleventh Street: Demolition Application for a Pre-1900 House
As will become standard with our new policy (see below), any pre-1900 house where the owner has applied for Demolition will have that application reviewed by Council and the Heritage Conservation Commission. In the case of this 1892 house in the Brow of the Hill, there appears to be little of heritage value that can be conserved. Council moved the staff recommendation to proceed with issuing a demolition permit.

320 Fifth Avenue: Demolition Application for a Pre-1900 House
Same, but somewhat different. The Heritage Commission and Staff have recommended that Council move to protect this 1900 home in Queens Park for 60 days, providing time for staff to work with the owner on possible heritage conservation strategies. Council moved to support that recommendation.

Heritage Control Period Administrative Policy
Back on June 15, Council adopted the Heritage Control Period Bylaw for Queens Park. Although referred to as a “moratorium on demolition” by some, it is far from that. Instead, it is a new, and temporary, policy change that allows Council and the Heritage Commission closer oversight over demolitions and alterations that may seriously erode the heritage of the neighbourhood.

This report outlines the policy we will be using to manage that oversight. It’s worth a read if you are curious about the limits of powers that local governments have when it comes to protecting heritage.

258 Nelson’s Court: Development Permit Application for Third Residential Tower
Here is the preliminary report of the third residential tower at the Brewery District, There is a bunch of Public Consultation to come, so I’ll hold off my comments for now, except to say it seems to fit the Community Plan as recently amended.

Brewery District Master Development Permit: Update to Master Parking Plan
This has been discussed in earlier phases of the Brewery District development, as the developer works to manage the combined residential and commercial needs of the growing complex. There has been a desire on the part of the developer to increase the parking, and to shift parking access from Nelson Court to Keary Street. I am still of the opinion that this is better than the original access plan, but that Keary needs a better connection to Brunette, because Brewery District commercial traffic and RCH post-expansion traffic cannot be accommodated on East Columbia without seriously eroding the livability of Columbia as a street where we want people to be able to walk, shop, eat, and play. It would also exacerbate the neighborhood impacts in upper Sapperton.

Bring on the Sapperton Traffic Study!

Child Care in Queensborough: Proposed Action Plan
There is a profound lack of childcare available in Queensborough, even as family-friendly housing becomes the norm for that part of New West. Staff has a few ideas and strategies to bring more childcare on-line, as they fear the problem is becoming “critical”. This is becoming a strategic priority for the City, as the need speaks to so many of the City’s other policies around sustainability, and becoming more family-friendly and child-friendly as we develop, and “the market” doesn’t seem to be filling the need.

900 Carnarvon Street – Exemptions for Requirements of Flood Plain Bylaw
Some details around how the ground-level commercial development and the underground parking of the 4th tower at Plaza88 don’t comply with the strict language of the Flood Plain Bylaw. There are perfectly reasonable engineering solutions to manage these non-compliances, but specific exemptions are required to allow those engineering solutions to be used.

Structural Considerations for Food Trucks on the Parkade
Food trucks are now allowed to operate in various places in the City, and it seemed to some on Council (me included) that the 4th Street overpass area of the Parkade was a natural place for them to set up. Visible, lots of foot traffic, not blocking access to any business, ample parking, etc.

Staff have now provided us a bit of an engineering assessment, outlining the potential challenges with this plan. Apparently, the Parkade is not built to accommodate the types of total and point loads that many Food Trucks apply. (who knew those things were so heavy?). Accommodating lighter trucks on some occasions might work out, but it is looking like more hassle than it would be worth for any operators.

In short: great idea, not exactly practical.

Qayqayt Transportation Safety – Update
I blogged a little bit ago about increased concerns at the Third Street crosswalk across Royal Ave, and concerns that have been raised regarding the safety of students headed to and from Qayqayt School.

This report outlines some of the engineering improvements our Staff are proposing to make the intersection easier to navigate and safer for pedestrians and cyclists. Again, I am happy to see us taking some serious action and putting our limited transportation resources into the priorities set out in our Master Transportation Plan. Our staff deserve kudos for some good creative work here!

Access Ability Advisory Committee Request: City Council Support of the Barrier Free BC Motion
I’m the Chair of the AAAC, and that group received a presentation from Barrier Free BC, an organization lobbying the Provincial government to pass a British Columbians with Disabilities Act. In a similar model to the Americans with Disabilities Act, the desire is to make accommodation of those with disabilities a legal requirement for all public spaces and businesses.

The AAAC like the idea, and recommended support to Council, but staff has asked to be given a bit of time to assess the implications for City operations. Such a piece of legislation would be far-reaching, and would impact not just transportation, but how we design buildings, our public facilities, and almost everything the City touches. If we call on the Provincial government to do this, we need also to call on them to Partner with local governments to fund the necessary infrastructure changes. For some reason, I don’t think that is something the Provincial Government is quick to sign up for.

This issue is coming to the UBCM conference in September, and it will good for our Council to have a high-level report from Staff prior to that to have a fuller understanding about what the motion means from a City budget and operations viewpoint. As much as I support the intentions, responsible governance requires we need to do a little due diligence here.

Pre-1900 Heritage House Policy
Aside from the heritage protection period (and eventual Heritage Designation Area?) approach being used in Queens Park, the City is continuing to explore ways to preserve important heritage assets in the rest of the City. For all the talk of the importance of heritage to New West, very little legislation exists for us to protect those assets when they are private properties. This issue is important to address now so we can include these approaches as part of our larger OCP update, and the increased pressure caused by the current housing price blip bubble crisis trend.

This table shows the status of all pre-1900 houses in New Westminster.

With the ongoing Queens Park heritage protection work, all 100 of the houses there have at least some level of protection for the next year. All but 19 of the 145 outside of Queens Park have no protection at all, and not having limitless resources in the City, this is a logical place for us to concentrate our efforts in the next little while.

Placing all of the homes on the Heritage Register will identify their value, but will not actually do anything to protect them. While it would eat up a considerable amount of staff resources (each home would need an separate evaluation of their heritage value and character-defining elements, a potentially lengthy process), the Register has not regulatory protection attached to it.

Instead, staff are going to develop a policy through which pre-1900 homes are required to come through a Heritage Review and Council prior to demolition or heritage-impacting alteration, in a similar process to how the temporary neighborhood-wide protection policy in Queens Park operates.

---

We had a couple of public delegations that related to issues coming up later in the agenda, but one item that we moved from Delegation:

NWEP Community Garden
The New Westminster Environmental Partners are the latest of several groups who have raised the idea of turning a portion of the front lawn of City Hall into a Community Garden.

The City has a couple of small community gardens, but every garden plot that is opened very soon is gobbled up and a waiting list is established. As New West continues to develop, areas like Downtown and the Brow of the Hill are seeing denser development, with few opportunities for people to have a little garden plot. The lawn at City Hall is expansive, and there is a natural area near the intersection of 4th Street that would be great for some community garden plots.

There are lots of details to work out: installing Community Gardens is not free, and there will be a need for some infrastructure investment (water supply, possibly storage, waste management), and the New Westminster Community Gardens Society or a similar organization will have to be brought in to establish how the plots will be used and allocated. So this is not a “done deal”, but Council did show strong support for the idea, so if all the stars align, we may have plots as early as next year.

---

After Delegations, we discussed the following items that were Removed from Consent

Branding for New Westminster Waterfront Vision – “The Riverfront”
I don’t call out my Council colleagues too often when I disagree with them, but I am still of the opinion this was a silly decision made poorly.

I cannot emphasize enough: this has nothing to do with the Tin Soldier itself, nor is it another trip down the “Old vs. New” New West trope that has enlivened wedge-drivers for decades. Instead, this (for me) is about how the branding proposed was good, and scotch-taping the Tin Soldier on doesn’t add, but takes away by confusing and cluttering the clean look of the brand.

However, much like my expressed opinions on Public Art, Council sometimes needs to sit back and understand that *not all decisions need executive input*. We hire professionals for a reason, and in this case we paid professionals to do a professional job. When dealing with subjective matters of aesthetic and design and their use in marketing, we may need to admit that we have limitations (none of us mentioned our graphic design skills in our election campaigns) and should have a process that separates our subjectivity from the decision making. In this case, we did the opposite, and voted *against* the recommendation of both the professionals we paid to give us their professional opinions, and our own professional staff for no other reason that “we like it better”. We wouldn’t do that with an engineering recommendation of what size of pipe to use, we wouldn’t do that with the Fire Department when they recommend what type of oxygen mask to purchase, why is the work of design or art professionals not treated with similar respect? (I’ll be the first to admit – on sustainable transportation issues, I’ll push the envelope this way myself!)

The suggestion made after this decision that Council needs to get *more* involved in branding exercises like this is something I cannot disagree with more.
It was totally a coincidence that friend the day before sent me a link to this Ted Talk on Flags, and why City Flags so commonly suffer from bad design. The money quote: “Good design and Democracy don’t go together”. You can’t design by committee, or you get terrible results like a lurky guy hanging out on the edge of the bushes marring an otherwise good design.

Really, in the end the branding works, and in the great scheme of things, this is not something to get my knickers in a knot over. However, I think it is the pathway to the decision that irks me more than end result. Klaatu Barada Nikto.

Request for Funding to Host the Live Streaming of the Tragically Hip Concert
This is a great idea that mostly arose from social media chatter. Of course, the entire idea that the last Tragically Hip concert should must be broadcast by our National Broadcaster was something that grew from social media chatter. It points to this being a cultural touchstone moment.

There was some local talk of finding inside broadcasters when someone noticed that the StrEAT Food Festival was happening at that time in New West, and ideas collide!

The cost of the big screen is more than I anticipated, which is why I hope we can bring in a couple of corporate sponsors to share the load, but this could make for a spectacular day on Columbia Street, and ramp up the regional exposure of the Downtown BIA’s biggest annual event. The fact that even the suggestion that we might do this has already resulted n front-page news in some regional media is a sign that this is something beyond New West.

It isn’t a slam dunk, though. Whether we can actually broadcast this event to the public and how those broadcasting rights will be managed, is a detail yet to be worked out. There is no plan to charge for viewing, so the rights discussion might be easier, unless there was already a plan for others to make money charging for outside broadcasts. There are still unknowns here, but I hope we can pull it off.

I also hope it is an opportunity for the City and the BIA to work with the Cancer Society, the Brain Tumour Foundation of Canada, or another appropriate charity to help promote the event, and hopefully attract donations.

Keep your fingers crossed, and hopefully on August 20th the second best place to be in Canada (after Kingston!) will be downtown New West.

801 Columbia Street: DP for Three Story Commercial Building
This property at the corner of 8th Street and Columbia, previously referred to as the Kyoto Block, was sold by the City some time in 2014. Way back in 2011, I wrote this post about the Kyoto block, and still feel much the same way about it. We now have much less control over its fate, however I think it is still important that any building put on this spot be an amenity to the pedestrian realm, and create a useful and welcoming connection between Columbia Street and the concourse level at the Shops and Westminster Station.

I am as big a fan of craft beer as I am of the Tragically Hip, so I am excited that a solid regional brand like CRAFT is looking to set up shop in our downtown, but I hope the building can connect the Shops and Columbia street, not separate them!

Downtown Uptown Connector (DUC) Shuttle
This report was preceded by a Public Delegation from the River Market, who have been the brains, money, and motivation behind the DUC for the last 9 months.

The DUC fills what has often been considered a gap in our local transportation picture –a frequent and cheap connection between Downtown and Uptown. Notably, a connection that spans a significant hill. The River Market partnered with a couple of local businesses to try a pilot project connecting the waterfront market with a couple of uptown destinations with a free shuttle bus having a predictable schedule.

They have paid for the pilot project, and are starting to see some success, but the pilot period is coming to an end, and the River Market has approached the City to ask us to contribute (along with a couple of other partners, notably including the Downtown BIA), to help fund an extension of the Pilot at least through to Labour Day, so that we can make a more informed choice about whether this is a service that the community wants to continue to support. Seeing as Policy 3B in our Master Transportation Plan is “Continue to explore an affordable shuttle service that would provide residents and visitors with improved transit service between Downtown and Uptown”, I think contributing to this pilot is an affordable way for us to meet that goal.

Fraser River Middle School – Active Transportation Update
City staff, School District staff, and some active transportation organizations in the region have been working together to prepare for the opening of Fraser River Middle School.

By the very nature of its grade offerings, a Middle School should be encouraging active transportation. Students that walk or ride their bikes to school do better at school, have fewer behavior problems, concentrate better, and are healthier. It is the City’s job to make sure they have Safe Routes to School, and we are working to get as much in place as possible before Fraser River opens in September.

Tree Protection and Regulation Bylaw Status Update
The numbers are starting to roll in on the Tree Bylaw – and a lot of trees have been protected. We have also recovered quite a bit of money for trees lost to the community, with that money earmarked for planting and maintaining replacement trees on City lands.

That doesn’t mean there haven’t been a few hiccups with the implementation of the new Bylaw. I (along with other Councilors, I’m sure) have heard from a few residents about specific quirks (why protect an invasive holly tree? When does a potentially damaging tree become a hazardous tree? Why does a homeowner have to give the City a $10,000 deposit, when you can always fine me if I don’t follow the rules and take it off my taxes?).

I had hoped that we could have a workshop with Council this spring to talk about some of these implementation concerns, but it looks like it is going to have to wait until the Fall.

---

Finally, we moved on to the Bylaws portion of the evening’s festivities.

Housing Agreement (Brewery District) Bylaw No. 7838, 2016
Zoning Amendment (Brewery District) Bylaw No. 7841, 2016
The housing agreements and zoning amendments for the second residential building at the Brewery District are adopted. This is now the law of the land, as the Sappers would have liked.

Downtown Development Agreement (900 Carnarvon) Bylaw
The Bylaw that formalized the interface between City infrastructure and the 4th tower at Plaza88 is now adopted. Adjust your behavior accordingly.

Mobile Food Vending Licence Bylaw No. 7850, 2016
Bylaw Notice Enforcement Amendment Bylaw No. 7851, 2016
Development Services Fees Amendment Bylaw No. 7852, 2016
The set of Bylaws that regulate how Food Trucks operate in the City were, after more than a year of comprehensive and multi-faceted public consultation, adopted by Council. Free range barbequed quinoa tofu sundaes for all!

And after that, I hope you all enjoy a summer of fun in New West. Attend a festival, enjoy a Park, and be good to a neighbor. A community is what you make it.

Sorry I am so late getting this update done. I’m busy as ever with many evening events, and long hours contemplating how a leader who proposes a completely unnecessary and divisive referendum, then fails to win that referendum creating uncertainty and chaos, immediately resigns because of that failure,  relates to BC politics… but I digress.

Our June 20th Council day included a Workshop during the day where we discussed the branding of our Waterfront Vision, some long-term Capital Asset Management and had a pretty cool report outlining some visions for the “Public Realm” of Downtown New West – all topics that will no doubt be subject of future discussions here and in the community. We also had a pretty happening Agenda.

We also had a presentation of the 2015 Annual Report, which is a report on what the City did over the last year. You can read it all here.

The following Items were Moved on Consent:

228 Nelson’s Crescent: Housing Agreement Bylaw for Three Readings
This is the Housing Agreement that secures Market Rental use for the portion of 228 Nelson’s Crescent – the second residential tower at the Brewery District. This formally sets the terms that forces Wesgroup to only operate those suites as rental into the future.

This is a good thing for Sapperton, where the rental market is very limited. It isn’t subsidized housing, so the rentals will be “full market price”, but there is a good mix of more family-friendly 2+ and 3-bedroom apartment sizes, which should add another housing option adjacent to SkyTrain and the rapidly expanding RCH.

Consideration of Development Permit DPS00034 for Proposed GVRD Pump Station & Brunette Fraser Greenway Extension
This project has been a while coming, and Metro Vancouver was doing public consultation on park options at last year’s Riverfest in September. The new pump station that Metro is building at the end of the Brunette River will coincide with an extension of the Sapperton Landing Park and massive improvements for the public space at the mouth of the Brunette. As part of the City’s bigger Waterfront Vision to connect Pier Park and the Quay to the Central Valley Greenway along the Brunette River, this will be an important link and an important rest stop, as public bathrooms will be included in the park design. Kudos to MetroVancouver for having the foresight, I look forward to the City taking credit for this great amenity!

900 Carnarvon Street – Amendment to Development Agreement Bylaw  No. 7855, 2016
The work to get the last building in the Plaza88 development out of the ground is continuing. One of the things a City and a Developer have to do is agree on interface issues like sewer hookups and sidewalks and other boring details. In this case, we need to amend the Development Agreement Bylaw that sets out those conditions because of an adjustment in the location of the sound wall on the south side of the building.

Proposal for Temporary Street Closure and Public Realm Improvements on Sixth Street and Belmont Street
Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper, see if it works. If you have ever heard the current rock star of City Planning, Janette Sadik-Kahn, speak about how she worked in the Bloomberg administration to re-write how the streets of New York City work, you will recognize where New West is going here.

In her (great! Really, you should read it!) book Steetfight, Sadik-Kahn talks about how simple interventions in the public realm can make a big difference in how a street works, and improve how your City works. Her way of getting past the natural, and often boisterous, opposition to any kind of change is to pilot an idea in a temporary way – use paint and removable fixtures to see how the space works for a little while without committing huge time and cost to the project. If the pilot fails, it is cheap to remove, and no-one is worse off, if the pilot works, you can invest in making the pilot permanent. Instead of spending time and energy on a public consultation that is made up of drawings and people complaining about an intangible, you spend that public consultation money on a temporary installation, so people get to see how an idea works. Public opposition to change often become a public embrace of a new idea.

In New West, we have seen a few ideas like this creeping in. The Parklet installed in Sapperton last year (a few complaints, but far outnumbered by positive feedback!), the sand courts at Pier Park (who wants a beach with no water!? – apparently lots of people!), and now a partial closure of Belmont Street to make an expanded public seating area.

We are doing it cheaply and quickly, but the Farmers Market over the winter was a demonstration that road closures along Belmont are possible, so I have a good feeling. People’s inclination to oppose “loitering” will push up against people’s desire to have common spaces. It will be interesting to see how this installation works.

234 Second Street: Demolition Application for a Pre-1900 House
Yes, Council approved the demolition of a pre-1900 house in Queens Park the week after we passed a “moratorium” on demolitions of heritage homes in Queens Park.

To clarify, despite what the media may report, there is no “moratorium” on demolitions. Council passed a Bylaw that puts special protection on pre-1966 homes in Queens Park Study Area for a period of one year. Anyone with a 50-year-old or older house who wishes to demolish or significantly alter that house will need to go through a special permitting process, and demolitions will have to come through Council. Council has the authority, under this temporary Bylaw, to deny that demolition permit in order to preserve heritage values of the community.

In this case, the owner of the house and their architect made a case that the heritage value of the house is low, as it is of significant age, but has little character of historic significance. The building itself is in such a condition that repairs that would restore the heritage value are economically unfeasible.

Council moved to approve the demo permit, but I would not expect this to become a trend.

---

The following Items were removed from consent for discussion:

2016 City Partnership Grant – Rivershed Society of British Columbia
2016 Community Grant Application – Royal City Curling Club
These were two “outside of the cycle” Community Grant requests that came to Council, both supported by Council. I voted for one, and against the other, which I leaves me trying to explain why my decisions were not arbitrary.

The Rivershed Society of BC asked for $5,000 to support their AGM and a one-day event at the Fraser River Discovery Centre (I voted against). The Royal City Curling Club asked for ~14,000 to support bringing the week-long BC Junior Curling Championships to New Westminster in December (I voted for the recommendation for a smaller grant amount of $4,000).

These are two groups I support! I curl at the RCCC, though I am not a member of the Board, nor am I in any way involved in the organization of the Juniors. I also support the work of the RSBC, and even gave a talk at one of their events not too long ago, along with generally being a supporter of the work Fin Donnelly has done to call attention to the importance of the ecology of the Fraser River. So If I have a bias here, it is for both organizations.

The RCCC was not able to apply during the regular cycle of Community Grants. The process CurlBC uses to determine hosts for provincial events doesn’t happen until the Spring, and as the Juniors is the first provincial event, it is held in the last week of December instead of early in the new year like seniors, mens’ and womens’ provincials. Our grant application and award cycle doesn’t work. for Juniors – although it notably would work for any other Provincial competition CurlBC. Otherwise, the Grant meets the criteria, is in line with what we offer similar organizations doing similar stuff (although, notably, more often through the Amateur Sports Grant), and there was a recommended award by the committee that oversees grant awards.

The RSBC did not indicate they were unable to apply during the regular granting period. Nothing about their request was extraordinary except they apparently chose to make it in June instead of in November when the applications were due. They should have anticipated the need, and made the request at the same time as the many organizations that *did* meet the deadline. Their annual event is at the same time as last year, when this Council extraordinarily granted them a similar amount as a one-time thing outside of the regular process. Once is an anomaly, totally understandable. Twice is a trend, though, and I cannot support continuing to support that trend. I don’t think it is fair to the other organizations that got their stuff in on time.

---

We then, having hit the designated hour, moved onto our scheduled Public Hearings on two topics:

Mobile Food Vending Bylaw No. 7850, 2016
Staff have been working on a Bylaw to allow Food Trucks to operate within the City, outside of festival events. It is (typical of government) more complicated than just saying “yes”, as there are business licenses, health authority regulations, insurance and liability concerns, and of course, public consultation – especially with the business community.

On the positive side, I think food trucks are great addition to the street scene. They can activate commercial areas, adding to foot traffic for adjacent businesses and make our street more “sticky”. There is a philosophy in Urbanism, from Jane Jacobs to Charles Montgomery, that more people on a street makes a street work better, because it adds to the social character of a City, and therefore feeds the economic character of the City. You can double the number of people on a street by attracting twice as many people, or by making everyone already there spent twice as much time on the street. Food Trucks can contribute to both of these.

On the less positive side, I’m not sure how much uptake we are going to get from food truck operators. The industry is tough, with razor-thin margins. Every jurisdiction (including ours) has its own regulatory hurdles, and operators have to decide which it is worth their time to invest. The lack of off-truck support like commissary kitchens (which, if you are selling food to the public, can’t just be the stove in your basement suite) out here in the ‘burbs adds one more cost and hassle.

I’m happy to open the door and remain optimistic, but let’s see who decides to come in.

HRA Bylaw No. 7854, 2016 and Heritage Designation Bylaw No. 7853, 2016 for 1031 Sixth Avenue
The ongoing saga of the 1891 McLaughlin House finally came to Public Hearing.

The (shorter) history of this project is that the house was slated for demolition several months ago, and staff brought that information to Council, recognizing that Council had previously highlighted a desire to preserve and protect pre-1900 homes wherever possible. At the time of the demolition permit application, this house had no legal protection. The City had no legal ability to prevent the house from being demolished. Our only hope was to work with the homeowner and provide him incentives to protect the house.

Through months of work by staff, by the applicant, and by the architect hired by the applicant, a plan was developed that would provide long-term protection to a restored McLaughlin House, yet allow the homeowner to build a home on his property that fulfilled his family’s needs. It wasn’t a perfect plan, but it was a negotiated compromise between the City and the landowner.

It was clear form the correspondence we received (7 letters, all opposed), and from the presentations at the Public Hearing (more than a dozen presentations, only the representative of the homeowner in support), that the neighbourhood did not support this innovative approach of significantly increasing the density on the lot.

---

Public Hearing over, we went back to our Regular Agenda, which started with us addressing the Bylaws we just covered in the Public Hearing.

Heritage Designation (1031 Sixth Avenue) Bylaw No. 7853, 2016
Heritage Revitalization Agreement (1031 Sixth Avenue) Bylaw No.  7854, 2016
As discussed above, Council moved to reject the Application and the Heritage Conservation Plan that was presented. We did this recognizing that demolition of the 125-year-old home is likely. The inability to reach a preservation plan that the community could support is disappointing. No doubt many in the community are going to be disappointed by the inability of a City Council to prevent the demolition of a privately owned house on private property, but we are regulated by the Local Government Act, and homeowners have rights, including the right to knock their house down and replace it with a home that meets the zoning of the property.

It is possible that a preservation plan will come together, however, the homeowner has already spent a considerable amount of time and money to get to this point, only to have his work rejected. Everyone has their limits.

Mobile Food Vending Bylaw No. 7850, 2016
As discussed above, Council moved to give the Bylaw that would permit food trucks to operate in the City on a regular basis third reading. Warm up your artisanal kale-and-cheese waffle wagon.

---

We then had an Opportunity to be Heard:

Temporary Use Permit No. 00013 for 401 and 451 Salter Street
A movie Studio wants to use one of the big old industrial buildings in Queensborough near the Derwent Bridge to film some TV and Movie magic. This does not strictly meet the designated landuse in the zoning for the property, so short of doing a complete rezoning. No-one corresponded on the issue, and no-one came to speak to Council for or against the idea.

---

And one final regular agenda item:

Potential of Obtaining a Liquor License to Sell Beer and Wine at the
Westminster Pier Park Concession Eats at the Pier
We asked for a report on the legislative outlook at being able to sell beer of wine at the Pier Park concession on a regular basis. The short version is that there is not liquor license model that works for the location. As the “restaurant” does not have inside seating, it does not fit the regular license criteria. It is possible to do “special event licenses” for one-off events like last summer’s Pecha Kucha in the Park with all the regular beer garden accoutrement (security, cordoned off area, identification protocols, etc.), but that can’t be a day-to day thing.

We need to change the Provincial Liquor laws. We still have this strange puritan idea that alcohol must be separated from public space, the last vestiges of temperance laws from a century ago. So far. this provincial government has been long on promise, short on delivery of moving us into the 21st century.

---

We then moved onto the evening’s Bylaws for consideration:

Housing Agreement (228 Nelson’s Crescent) Bylaw No. 7838, 2016
As discussed above, this Bylaw formalizing the requirement for market rentals at the second Brewery District tower received three readings.

REGARDING Development Agreement (900 Carnarvon) Bylaw No. 7855, 2016
As discussed above, in order to fix the language in the Development Agreement Bylaw, we first RESCINDED the Third reading given to the Bylaw on May 30, 2016, Then gave Revised Bylaw No. 7855, 2016 Third reading.

HRA (313 Queens’s Avenue) Bylaw No. 7834, 2016
Heritage Designation (313 Queens’s Avenue) Bylaw No. 7835,2016
As discussed last meeting this Bylaw to allow renovation of the Heritage House on Queens Ave in exchange for permanent protection by a Heritage Designation was adopted. It is now the Law of the Land, please adjust your behavior accordingly.

Zoning Amendment (900 Carnarvon Street) Bylaw No. 7764,2015
As discussed last meeting, this Bylaw amending the zoning for the 4th tower at Palza88 is adopted. It is now the Law of the Land, please adjust your behavior accordingly.

Five Year Financial Plan (2015-2019) Amendment Bylaw No.7849, 2016
As discussed last meeting, this Bylaw amending our Budget is adopted. It is now the Law of the Land, please adjust your behavior accordingly.

We then talked about Correspondence from the Postal Workers, asking that we continue to support home delivery of mail in Canada, which this Council does.

And we were done until July 4th.

Our June 13 Regular Council Meeting started with a Presentation and Opportunity to be Heard on this Bylaw Amendment:

Five Year Financial Plan (2015-2019) Amendment Bylaw
The Financial Plan is, colloquially, the “budget” for the city, and it is a regulatory document that requires a Bylaw Amendment whenever we change it.

As we have just completed our 2015 Audited Statements, and due to the nature of budget forecasting, some adjustments to the existing 5-Year Plan need to be made to reflect the numbers in those Audited Statements.

Not surprisingly, no-one came to speak to the Bylaw Amendment, so we referred it to later in the meeting.

---

We then passed the following items On Consent:

Anvil Centre Artist in Residence Program
As part of the ongoing evolution of our Community’s new Centre for Arts, this program will bring a local artist in-house to work on their practice with dedicated studio time, and to better activate the 4th floor studios. Watch for a call for submissions in the Fall.

Metro Vancouver Request for Exemption to Construction Noise Bylaw
Metro needs to do some sanitary sewer work on the 300 Block of Columbia Street. The work needs to happen in the middle of the night because that is when the sewers are empty enough to allow the work to take place without causing inconvenience to sewer users. We are all sewer users. Late night work needs a Noise Exemption, and we moved to grant it for two nights between June 15 and June 29th (depending on weather).

824 Agnes Street: Chinese Benevolent Association (CBA) Park Visioning Consultation Report
The open lot at Carnarvon across from McInnes has been used in part as a dog run, but is also considered for Provincial recognition as a Chinese Historic Place, as it is a portion of the original “Chinatown” in British Columbia, and had a variety of uses in the Chinese community in the early years of the city.

Working with the Chinese Benevolent Association, the City is exploring a future park on the site to commemorate the site history. We are now engaging a landscape architect to develop concepts drawn from the visioning sessions.

Union of BC Municipalities Resolution Related to Tenant Evictions through Renovations
We have talked at council several times about the “renoviction” (and “demovictions”) problem in the region, and increasingly in the City. Our Council is taking a resolution to the Union of BC Municipalities to help address one aspect of this, hopefully reducing the incentives to evict residents for minor renovation and rent hikes. We will also be seeking support from other Municipalities in the regions.

Official Community Plan Review – Draft Policies and Revised Vision and Goals
“New Westminster is a caring, healthy, inclusive, sustainable, complete and prosperous city where investment, growth and development contribute to a high quality of life for all. Community members have opportunities to connect to the natural environment and to each other. The city is well connected by exceptional public spaces and is easily accessible by foot and by wheels. Each neighbourhood has a unique character and cultural identity, and exhibits a high quality of urban design that is well integrated with the city’s heritage assets.”

This report outlines some of the Vision and Goals statements and Draft Policies that will provide the backbone of the new Official Community Plan. We have spent much of the last year consulting on the eventual Land Use Plan, and a draft plan is nearing completion. However, as important in the OCP are the goals and visions that will define how our City will operate in the decades ahead.

The vision, goals and draft policies in this report will be going out the public for comment as the next stage of OCP consultation. We’re not done yet, folks. However, we are still hoping to have a new Official Community Plan ready for adoption in early 2017, and significant midnight oil is being burned to make that happen. More to come!

Heritage Control Period Bylaw and Heritage Alteration Permit Procedures Bylaw – For Three Readings
There has been increasing concern about demolition of heritage homes in New Westminster, no more than in Queens Park. The residents of Queens Park have organized a Heritage Preservation society, and have worked though their Residents Association with the City’s Heritage Commission and staff to develop a Heritage Study, review potential policy changes, and propose some strategies to preserve heritage homes. The proposed approaches have so far seen strong support from a large number of Queens Park residents.

There are limited things a Local Government can do under our empowering legislation when it comes to limiting the things you can and cannot do on your private property. We can (reasonably) prevent you from cutting down a tree, but we cannot (reasonably) prevent you from knocking down your house. Don’t blame me, blame the Community Charter.

One way a City can increase its power to protect individual homes from demolition is to establish a Heritage Conservation Area. The Queens Park group has asked the City to explore this option, and we are doing so. However, it will take time for the HCA to be developed, to draft appropriate legislation and set up internal policies and procedures to make it work. We don’t want a bunch of speculators to get in there and start knocking houses down while the City gets its ducks in a row.

Therefore, using powers the City has under the Local Government Act, we can establish a temporary Heritage Control Period over a specific area for up to one year. This will allow us to establish better oversight, and even temporarily prevent demolitions of individual homes until we get the HCA developed. The conversation should be starting now about whether this is the way the neighbourhood and the larger community want to go.

I suspect there will be a *lot* of conversation about this over the next 12 months, and I am curious about where this goes!

612 – 618 Brantford Street: Preliminary Report
This project to build a mid-rise apartment building adjacent to Bent Court in the Brow of the Hill is pretty early in the process. It will be going to review committees, to public consultation, and eventually to Public Hearing, so I’ll hold off my comments for now and wait to hear what the neighbourhood and general community think.

Sixth Street and Belmont Street Traffic Control
This is a follow up to the earlier report on the “Coffee Corner” which got a little tongue-in cheek press last month. After reviewing the recommendations and having discussions both internally and with the Advisory Committee for Transit, Bicycles and Pedestrians, a modified plan was put together that will see better lighting of the crossing without the need for “beg buttons” – a plan I can support practically and philosophically.

Alternative Approval Process for Loan Authorization Bylaw No. 7842, 2016
Ugh. I hate the AAP, but have yet to come up with an alternative solution for how we prepare ourselves for the capital projects our community wants us to get done.

We are starting the process to prepare the City to secure up to $28.3 Million in borrowing ability. We are not necessarily going to borrow this money, but we do want to get the equivalent of a Line of Credit in case we need to secure cash to pay for upcoming capital works.

Those who remember a few years back (when I was notably opposed to this very form of reverse-referendum) will remember that the City cannot borrow for more than 5 years without approval of the electorate, yet we are allowed to seek that approval by seeing if more than 10% of the voters in the city are willing to fill out a form in opposition.

There will be notices in the paper and forms at City Hall, c’mon out and let us know if you think this is a bad idea.

Sapperton Park Playground Redevelopment – Preferred Option
The playground of Sapperton Park is getting a re-design and upgrade. Read the report to see what the public consultation said about the alternate designs. We should see this park renewed by next spring!

Street Food Vending at Westminster Pier Park
We are going to pilot allowing Food Trucks at the western entrance of Pier Park, as part of our very coy flirtation with making Food Trucks part of our City’s street life.

PIKNIC ELECTRONIK 2016 Concert Postponement
The proponents who wanted to hold a two-day electronic music event at Pier Park have determined that they could not secure the right talent mix to make the event successful in 2016, so they are re-booting for 2017. This doesn’t change our festival funding situation for 2016, or 2017 for that matter, as the PIKNIC folks were going to pay their own way, they only asked that the City waive the fees that would have been charged for the use of public space.

Special Occasion Permit for New Westminster Minor Baseball Association
New West Baseball wants to sell beer in part of the stands at Queens Park Stadium for the 2016 Playoff Tournament. Who am I to keep baseball fans from beer and hot dogs?

---

The following Reports were discussed by Council:

Update on Council’s Strategic Initiatives
We received a progress update on three of our Strategic Initiatives:

Canada Games Pool Replacement
With the Public Consultation process that will inform the design of the replacement for the CGP and Centennial Community Centre, it is timely to update the public on the work done already. As indicated, Council has decided that we need a new pool, and cannot invest in continued upgrades of the existing pool. We have also decided that the new facility will be built adjacent to the existing pool, although the exact locations and layout will be impacted by what comes out of the public consultation about what services, programs, and amenities the community is willing to finance in the new facility.

Those decisions were not made lightly. We went through a preliminary analysis of more than a dozen locations in almost every neighbourhood of the City, and shortlisted three primary locations for detailed analysis. Those three were evaluated for site layout, synergies with adjacent facilities, land ownership, geotechnical work, transportation options, user groups, and other factors. I was swayed by the body of evidence that the current location balances the various factors best. It isn’t the perfect place, but it is the best place available.

Housing Affordability Strategies
The City is moving forward on three Affordable Housing projects. Two will be smaller scale and will include some supportive housing and non-market housing, both in partnership with social service agencies in the City (Community Living and WINGS). The third will be a mix of market and non-market housing in partnership with Metro Vancouver at the current Muni Evers Park site.

As the most affordable housing is often the house people are already in, we are developing some enhanced protection policies for renters in the City. We are trying to reduce the impact of “Renovictions” within our limited Local Government Act powers, and are looking at a “rent Bank” support mechanism to keep people suffering from short-term setbacks from ending up on the street.

We also have a lot of market rental housing coming on line in the next couple of years, more than 1,200 suites. There have been very few new dedicated rental buildings constructed in New Westminster in the last decade, and vacancies are in the low single digit percentages. We have created the incentives necessary to make building market rental viable for the development community to get the stock back to where it needs to be to have some of that stock available and affordable.

Animal Shelter and Tow Yard
The City’s Animal Shelter is well past its replacement date, and the Previous Council developed a good plan to sell the land where the current tow yard is and use that money o finance the building of a new facility. We can expect the tow yard under the Queensborough Bridge to be coming on line next year, and a new animal facility across the street about a year after that.

New Westminster Fire Rescue: EMA EMR Certification and
Administration of Naloxone Signing of Collaboration Agreement
We had quite a lengthy discussion about these two related issues: the current opioid overdose crisis, and the current crisis in ambulance services. I think this is too big a topic to put in this summary, so I will save it for a future blog post – coming soon.

Except to say that I am shocked that this table is not front page news in New West:

Allocation of the Voluntary Amenity Contribution Funds
The City collects VACs from developers when larger developments occur. They don’t go in general revenue, but are earmarked for specific purposes. This report outlines how $395,000 of accumulated VACs will be spent, and include those in the Five-year Financial Plan as such.

1031 Sixth Avenue: Updated Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw 7854, 2016
This on-again off-again Heritage Revitalization project for the 1891 single family home in brow of the hill will be going to Public Hearing on June 20, 2016. C’mon out and tell us what you think!

Downtown Dog Relief Station
This is a somewhat innovative idea- part pocket park, mostly outdoor convenience stop for dogs. A small park, the size of a parking spot, with an artificial turf surface and drainage to allow it to manage the waste it receives, in the downtown area where there is a general lack of places for dogs to go.

Many jokes here, and a few pooperational challenges, but we are not the first to try this, so I am interested to see how the pilot program goes!

---

Finally, we went through our Bylaws for the night:

Heritage Revitalization Agreement (1031 Sixth Avenue) Bylaw No. 7854, 2016:
First and Second Reading of Bylaw No. 7854, 2016
Due to some changes in language since first and second reading, we rescinded those readings, paving the way for:
Revised Bylaw No. 7854, 2016
Our giving First and Second reading to a revised version of the Bylaw. This HRA for the 1891 house on Sixth Ave in Moody Park will be going to Public Hearing on June 20, 2016. C’mon out and let us know what you think!

Heritage Control Period Bylaw No. 7856, 2016
This Bylaw will extend temporary (one year) added protection to pre-1966 homes in the Queens Park neighbourhood while the City gets ideas for a permanent Heritage Conservation Area organized and discussed in the general public. Contrary to what some have reported in the Social Media, this is not a “moratorium on demolitions”, but a temporary process whereby people asking for demolitions or alterations of their pre-1966 residential properties will require an extra review, to assure that heritage assets are not lost. This Bylaw passed three readings.

**Note: The Bylaw was formally Adopted by Council in a special meeting on June 15 – it is the Law of the Land, folks, for one year.**

Heritage Alteration Permit Procedures Bylaw No. 7859, 2016
This Bylaw created procedures to empower the Bylaw above, and also received three readings.

Five Year Financial Plan (2015-2019) Amendment Bylaw No. 7849, 2016
As discussed at the beginning of tonight’s meeting, this Bylaw updates our Five-year Financial Plan to reflect minor edits coming out of the audited annual reporting. The Bylaw received three readings.

Electrical Utility Amendment Bylaw No. 7848, 2016
As discussed at our May 30 Meeting, this change to the Bylaw regulating our Electrical Utility was Adopted by Council. It is now the Law of the Land, and I would appreciate it if everyone adapt quickly to this new way of life.

Road Closure Bylaw No. 7824, 2016
As discussed at our May 30 Meeting, this closure of an unopened alleyway off of Fifth Ave near 12th Street was Adopted by Council. It is now the Law of the Land, adjust your plans accordingly.