Beaconsfield Park Turf Field – Defer to Q2 2026
Motion 6 · Board Committee Meeting – March 30, 2026, March 30, 2026
Summary
- Amendment proposed to defer the Beaconsfield Park turf field concept plan approval to Q2 2026 to allow staff to report back on 60-metre field feasibility and costing, and to conduct further consultation with user groups not previously engaged.
- Mover cited concerns that several major soccer associations (VAYSA, BC Coastal Soccer League, BC Soccer, Vancouver Athletic Football Club) had not been directly consulted before the report was prepared
- Staff advised that Q2 2026 is already underway and a report-back within that quarter would not be feasible; further noted that the preference for 60 metres was already clearly expressed and could be incorporated without re-opening the full engagement process
- Other commissioners noted the project has been in development for 15 years and that continued engagement will occur through detailed design; the amendment to require 60-metre width (Motion 5) was seen as addressing the core concern
- Defeated unanimously; all commissioners voted against deferral
Vote
Transcript
27 segments
This is another painful decision. And I'll defer my time to Commissioner Jensen and come back in a moment.
Okay. Commissioner Jensen, go ahead.
Thank you. It took me a while to get everything ready, but I've submitted an amendment in writing and would like to strike and replace A, to defer this recommendation to quarter 2, 2026, to allow staff to investigate field dimension, report back on the feasibility and costing of a 60-metre width, and to further consult with user groups to explain this out. Thank you. Sorry. To further explain this out, again, this came to this board July 2025, and I think there does need to be more consultation. Hearing from user groups that are completely in favour of this but didn't feel that they were properly heard I think is important to ensure that they have an opportunity to be heard in this. I think that that's where you get this... field dimensions being changed. I think it's really important that the sporting community is heard. The decision we make today is going to be quite considered. And so having them come back, and again, this would make sure that, again, we are doing this within the timeframe of the capital plan.
We'll need a seconder for this amendment. Can I get a seconder, please?
Commissioner Digby, thank you. And we'll move to questions to the mover of the amendment. Any questions for Commissioner Jensen on this amendment?
Commissioner Digby.
Yeah, so please explain how this improves the amendment and how does this connect to the capital plan where we are going to see a capital plan on the first week of June here and you've deferred this recommendation possibly until after that date.
Don't you think you're putting the whole project at risk?
Well, I think we can still as a board look to direct funds through the capital plan. And, you know, we know how much that money can be allocated for. But I would rather listen or rather have. the community to be heard than the seven of us. So, you know, staff has already engaged with the community. So having them report back by Q2, you know, there's a number of user groups that can simply leave their business cards. as a exit today and we can certainly ensure that their voices are heard and echoed in what's coming forward. But again, I do want to make sure that those that came to speak tonight and those that we heard from through emails are having an opportunity to be included in this very significant decision.
Commissioner Herr, questions to Commissioner Jensen. Thank you so much.
With the Italian Canadian Sports Federation, which is a major group, do you think that they could take it upon themselves to reach out to the various soccer groups without slowing this down?
Again, I would... I certainly trust their due diligence. I know that they've been involved in this as well, but I would actually prefer this driven by staff as part of a staff recommendation. Ultimately, for myself, I would love to see a recommendation that comes here that meets the needs of all user groups that are going to be actively engaging in this space, and that has been shared through consultation with staff. So again, to those that spoke tonight, and again, those that have shared their feelings through emails, that again, they're included in this consultation process. And again, this came to the board in July 2025. You know, requesting an additional bit of homework, I think, is not asking too much. And again, I trust staff that they'll be able to do that homework effectively and allow that to come back to this board with recommendations that meet not just the needs of the Italian Cultural Centre user group, but also to the other groups that came and spoke tonight.
Right. With the other clubs that came tonight, do you think the staff who have obviously heard the other groups consult with them as well because right now we're just in the planning process if you slow this down this might be another like we don't know what's going to happen after September even you just don't know rather than slowing it down we've already expressed our concerns to the staff and maybe they could do their due diligence as well rather than slowing this down to Q2. What do you think?
I stand by my motion. I believe in the turtle in the air and that slow and steady wins the race. And again, this is a pause that allows those to speak.
I mean, they have been waiting over 15 years.
Okay, Commissioner Herr, we're going to move on. Do you have any further questions? No, that's fine. Thank you. I just wanted to ask a question to the staff about the timing of Q2 2026 and the feasibility of reporting back in that timeline, just realizing that we are already at the end of March. Is Q2 something that's feasible to report back on? Thanks for the question. So a few things here is asking us to engage and report back. It's already Q2. We're in April, May, June, so we wouldn't have sufficient time. That being said, we have heard loud and clear from not only the Italian sports clubs, but other groups that their preference is for a 60 meter. So I do feel that that additional engagement might lead us back to the place we are now with a recommendation to explore and cost a 60 meter dimension. Thanks. Thank you. Sorry, to answer the question, it wouldn't be possible to report back within Q2, you're saying? We would struggle to effectively engage during that time. It is already Q2, so a Q2 report back would be due. It's still March. Well, minus a few hours. Thanks.
Commissioner Bastiwanski, go ahead.
Also a question to staff. Because at this point, it's only concept design. And so we just need to know, like, envelope for the capital plan. And so the engagement, you're still coming back to us. There's still opportunity for engagement. So have I understood that correctly?
Yes, you've understood that correctly. And just to reiterate the previous statement, the only reason, again, staff contemplated the 55 was to accommodate the seeding given the partnership opportunities that were discussed. We would not normally look to plan a field of that size. So, again, I think engaging further with users may be valuable, but it may also just delay this project when I think, again, we do know loud and clear that this would be the preference and this is where our sport field strategy would be recommending us as well. As much as I want to leave this decision to the board, I would highly recommend a decision tonight would be incredibly valuable to us. And again, there is still more touch points to come, and we can certainly ensure that the capital plan has sufficient leeway to make sure that this project can become a reality.
Yes, thank you. Okay.
Further questions?
No.
Okay, thank you. Any further questions to Commissioner Jensen?
Based upon staff, I can pull that. We can go back to the previous. We do need to call a vote on it, unfortunately.
But you will admit that if it's okay that people vote against it, you're okay with that, is what you're saying?
Again, as long as everyone understands that the purpose is to hear from the people. Yes, call it.
Okay, we do have to call a vote on it. All in favor of the amendment on the screen?
There we go.
Seeing that, all opposed?
I'll do that.
Oh, that is a unanimous opposition. I don't think we've ever had that at this board before. So we'll go back to the amended motion as black on the screen. Thank you for that, Commissioner Jensen. I think it clarified some things here. Commissioner Digby, we're still on comments on this one, so go ahead and make your comments, Commissioner Digby.