← Facilities Planning Committee April 8, 2026
and I would like to call the meeting to order. With deep gratitude and respect, we're honored to be learning and unlearning on the ancestral and the unceded lands of the Musqueam, Squamish, and TTsleil-Waututh Nation. The meeting is currently being broadcasted live, and both audio and video recording will be accessible to the public for viewing after the meeting ends. Footage from this meeting may be viewed from inside or outside of Canada. The board has a strong commitment to ethical conduct. This includes the responsibility of all participants to conduct themselves with appropriate decorum and professionalism. As a chair of the committee, it's my responsibility to see that decorum is maintained. Following presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions for clarification purposes. I ask all participants to keep questions and comments to the content provided in the presentation. DIRECTOR RIVERA- Before we begin I ask that all participants introduce themselves starting on my left.
FRED PODESTA. Janet Fraser Trustee Sheher.
DIRECTOR RIVERA- Trustee Victoria Jung committee member.
FRED PODESTA. Trustee Christopher Richardson alternate and therefore a committee member tonight.
DIRECTOR RANKIN. Trustee Susie Ma alternate committee member tonight.
DIRECTOR RANKIN. Angela Waterlow district PAC.
SUSETTE MAGRE QP 15.
LAURA REED VETVA. LARISSA LAM STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE. CARL JANSEY VANCOUVER SECONDARY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION EHIM.
AJAS HASSAN DIRECTOR VANCOUVER PROJECT OFFICE.
Dmytro Plokhotnyk, Senior Manager Maintenance Construction. Jesse Gresley-Jones, Executive Director of Facilities. Flavia Coghlan, Secretary-Treasurer in CFO.
Anna Chow, Recorder.
Helen McGregor, Superintendent. She, her. Thank you.
Thank you. And we have regrets from Trustee Reddy and Zhang this evening, as you have heard that we have two alternates attending this meeting right now. So moving on to the agenda of this evening there are three items for approval. I will ask Jesse Gressley-Jones to present the first item Capital By-law Number 2026-27 CPSD 39-01. Jesse Gressley- Thank you and good evening everyone.
So this item will provide a summary of the capital response letter and next steps for both major and minor capital projects. The letter was received from the ministry dated March 27th, 2026. In terms of major capital projects, no major capital projects were moved forward from capital plan status to project definition report status in the response letter.
Projects in development from previous years include the elementary school at Olympic Village, Henry Hudson Elementary Edition and Grenfell Elementary. And there's a brief summary of these projects included in the report.
The minor capital program includes the school enhancement program the carbon neutral capital program playground equipment program and the food infrastructure program. Submissions are made annually in September with a response and an approval in the spring.
Seven projects have been approved in the response letter and I will outline the projects on the following slides.
So under SEP we have two projects that were approved. The first is the phase two of the Crosstown Elementary project. This work includes additional piping throughout the building, existing HRV heat exchange coil upgrades to higher capacity, and installing ceiling-mounted hybrid refrigerant chilled water cooling units. And this is the second phase of a project that is already underway and was approved in the previous year's capital response letter. The second SEP project is for Killarney Secondary, and it includes a fire alarm and unseater panel upgrade to the existing building, along with wiring and device replacements as needed on legacy and obsolete equipment to ensure the facility is fire... is fire safety for occupants.
Two CNCP projects were approved, one at Cavell Elementary and a second at Charles Dickens Elementary. These both are for new heating and domestic hot water plant replacements of the legacy boilers with modern high efficiency boilers, pumps and controls that support substantial energy savings and improve HVAC reliability.
Additionally, two food infrastructure projects were approved, one at Churchill and a second at Killarney. The Churchill project is a replacement of an upgrade of essential kitchen oven and steam tables to support safe, efficient and code compliant operations. And the project at Killarney is the replacement of an aging reaching unit with a new commercial grade walking cooler and to replace the rationale oven to ensure reliable, efficient and safe kitchen operations.
And finally, the playground enhancement upgrade will be taking place at Sexsmith Elementary, and this is to upgrade the playground to a universally accessible playground. Again, playgrounds follow an established process, engaging with the pack and the school to design and deliver this project.
Thank you, Jesse. Are there any questions related to the presentation? Trustee Young.
Thank you very much and I appreciate all the work that goes into requesting major and minor capital projects. We have a lot of aging infrastructure and so I understand that your work will never be completed at the rate we're going, perhaps in the next two to 300 years. quite literally based on over 40 schools being not seismically safe and not getting any major project approved. Right now we're looking at that, unfortunately, hundreds of years thanks to lack of funding. I digress. How many minor capital land projects are normally approved annually?
This is similar to what was approved last year in terms of the number of projects in each category. DIRECTOR HAMPSON. Is it usually. May I continue Chair. So are we generally approved based on a dollar value or based on a number of projects.
FRED PODESTA. The overall projects are approved based on the availability of funding across the entire province and so our projects are ultimately prioritized against other priorities in other school districts. I think you know they do look at the need and the rationale we put forward for each of these projects to validate their necessity.
Follow up on the ranking and the risks and how we approach these projects and how we submit. Were there any big changes this year, either to the risk rankings or the way that you prepared the projects to submit that would have been different to previous years? And no, we followed a very similar process to last year and we continue to have an extensive list that we're slowly working our way through. We do evaluate reevaluate each year to ensure that we adjust priorities if we're seeing deterioration in one asset that needs to be moved up sooner.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Trustee Young. Trustee Fraser.
Thank you. My question is around the process that the Ministry of Infrastructure is using. And they seem to have changed the process a little bit because the letter has a different name. And I know we have a separate submission for childcare projects. Am I getting the sense that they're trying to fold the two different pieces into one thing? Is it impossible to speculate on what's happening at the ministry?
We cannot speculate what they're trying to accomplish, but in terms of the name of the letter, we know that the same name is being used for all the sectors that are now under the umbrella of the Ministry of Infrastructure.
Any other questions? Trustee Young. So the new HVAC at Crosstown, do we anticipate seeing the need for HVAC systems to be put into already established schools at this point with the different building codes used and the I understand that windows don't open like they used to in new buildings. So do you foresee the need?
We. we look at each site individually the this site is particularly challenged it is sort of tucked in underneath a strata residential building and There was challenges sort of immediately after occupancy. Our newer projects, our major capital projects are including cooling into the funding and the delivery, so we won't be in this situation again. But yes, every site is different. This one doesn't have good airflow, and that definitely gets in the way of even passive cooling at this site.
DIRECTOR RIVERA- Thank you. Okay. If there's no more questions we can look at the recommendation. And we have a recommendation for a motion that goes to the board for April 29 board meeting. And the recommendation reads that the School District Number 39 Vancouver Capital By-law Number 2026-27 CPST 39-01 be given three readings passed and adopted at the April 29, 2026 public board meeting.
Okay. So unanimous support. This will go to the board with the recommendation from the facilities planning committee in support.
Next under the items for approval, we have item 1.2, 2026-2027 annual facilities grant spending plan. I'll ask Jesse Gressley-Jones to present this item again. Thank you.
JESSE GRESSLEY- Thank you. So the Ministry of Infrastructure provides annual facilities grant AFG funding for projects required to maintain the facility asset through anticipated economic life and to prevent premature deterioration of these assets. The annual facilities grants can be used for upgrading or replacing existing facilities components enhancing the service potential of an existing capital asset or correcting a deficiency, for lowering the associated operating cost of an existing capital asset, or extending the life of an existing capital asset beyond its original anticipated life expectancy.
Facilities within the VSB are complex and aging, as was noted in the previous item, and funding has not kept pace with the accumulation of necessary maintenance within our facilities. Many of the schools are beyond their original intended useful life. And on an annual and ongoing basis, a significant amount of district budget is spent on operations and maintenance and addressing unplanned work that responds to maintaining service. The deteriorating building conditions result in escalating deferred maintenance costs, which is a future financial liability for the district.
The prioritization of funding becomes more challenging with the need to focus on critical services with less ability to adapt undertake proactive work. Supply chain challenges and inflation have continued to see dramatic cost increases and materials in materials and services. Tariffs have further reduced our spending power when procuring materials and this will impact tender bids for upcoming minor and major capital projects as we move forward. At this point, there's no indication that the current cost challenges will decrease in the coming years.
So when we set out to build the plan, we do look at two sets of criteria. The first, the primary criteria consider safety, operational criticality, educational delivery, deferred maintenance, obsolescence, and service expectations. Secondary criteria consider whether there is going to be major capital alignment, the capacity, the economic return, and skills continuity.
Preparation of the AFG spending plan is informed by the building condition assessments, our seismic vulnerability of each building, ongoing maintenance and lifecycle costs, and priorities that emerge through the 2026-2027 financial planning engagement process. The plan is prepared by maintenance and construction department but is done in collaboration with operations and education planning groups.
One of the key areas of focus is around safety compliance. This key focus is to address fundamental compliance related to the safe operations of existing systems.
These include things that are truly fundamental, like fire alarms, sprinkler systems, fire suppression systems, security systems, venting and boiler improvements. These items ensure that current systems are maintained to address safety compliance and support the ongoing safe operations of our facilities. Of note, there are several Telus fiber upgrades that are identified as well as improvements to our security connectivity across our aging facilities.
Another key area of focus is around accessibility improvements. Learning Services collaborates with the school communities and community partners to identify essential projects for each upcoming school year. Essential projects are deemed necessary for a student to access and participate in their school and these are put forward each year. All six projects that were identified as part of this process are part of this year's or sorry of next year's AFG. These initiatives will meet the known accessibility requirements of students ensuring supportive and inclusive educational environments.
So on the slide you can see the allocation of funds across the various categories. A full list of the projects can be found in attachment A. It is important to note that this is a large project list. It goes into a great level of detail. And we do evolve the projects. They are subject to change as we move through the year. And due to trades availability, material availability, procurement processes, there are some modifications that take place through the year. But these categories in front of you remain consistent with the spending occurring within each of those buckets throughout the year. Thank you.
Thank you, Jesse. Are there any questions related to the presentation?
Trustee Ma?
On page 26 of 68, under all schools, fourth from the bottom, about pruning, tree pruning. So is that all done by our internal staff or is that sent out?
So this is work that we do contract out. This reduces our liability and they're able to undertake all of the arborist reports, prioritize across various sites and undertake that work for us. We do have internal grounds teams who are able to address emerging priorities as sites are visited on an ongoing basis, but there is a significant amount of backlog in getting to ensuring that each of our sites is free and safe from any falling limbs and unsafe vegetation.
Trustee Young. I'm wondering how we account for like multi-year commitments that we have in here.
And if there are any and and if you can speak to that.
So larger projects we try and identify through the minor capital submissions, but items like that high pruning are ongoing initiatives, and so we take a subset of the needs and deliver them each year. And so you'll see those items show up each year in the AFG list.
Trust you mom. So going through the list of the chart, There doesn't seem to be anything to do with internal painting, like painting of classrooms or offices or anything like that. What kind of cycle do we normally go through to get that kind of work done?
So the internal painting, I mean we identified the need as building engineers and our operations staff would identify that in an ongoing basis, but we don't use AFG for interior painting of that sort.
It comes straight from operating.
Trustee Fraser?
Yes, thank you. I'm curious about the amount of the funding that's concentrated on safety compliance. The last paragraph on page five says that the draft expenditure plan includes projects totaling $7.7 million that address deferred maintenance and infrastructure deficiencies. Is that 7.7 million the entirety of the spending on safety compliance or is there, I'm just curious about how much of the total is concentrated on safety compliance?
I don't have that exact number in front of us. The 7.7 million was on deferred maintenance. The safety we could tally up all of the items that are related to safety compliance and provide that to you after the fact.
DIRECTOR HAMPSON- Thank you. I think that would be helpful to have have that in mind and maybe for a future board future boards future years it would be interesting to see how that changes.
Okay, seeing no further questions, I'm just prepared, sorry, Trustee Young.
I do have a quick question around like special purpose funding and capital funding and if there's, I see in the agenda, I guess you also mentioned to Susie that some of the funds come from different areas and I'm wondering if it's divided, if there's a way to see kind of special versus capital.
I DON'T KNOW IF SPECIAL IS THE RIGHT TERM. WE CAN, OKAY. So in the previous meeting, in the Finance and Personnel Committee, we presented the two components of Annual Facilities Grant. So the component that is the Special Purpose Fund component totals $2.25 million, and the capital component totals $14.46 million. When we plan, we plan across both funds. The separation between capital and special purpose, it's really more from a provincial perspective. It comes from two different buckets of funding. But from a practical perspective, we plan the work and then allocate it between the two funds. We plan for the overall amount of $16.52 million. and then we allocate the expenses according to the funding that's available. Thank you. What page are you looking at in the budget, please? In the budget, this starts on page 35 of the financial plan. Page 35 and 36. I appreciate that. It is also noted in the introduction on page 15 of the agenda package.
Dr. Simard?
Yes, on page 15 of 68, under the introduction section, second paragraph, second sentence, it says, should this value change, what would determine that change?
So at the time of writing this report, we had had confirmation from our ministry counterparts an email form, but we had yet to receive the formal posting of the AFG allocations to each district. Those were in fact posted today. So we can confirm that these are the final numbers.
Okay. So if there is no further question, I'm looking at the committee members. for the recommendation for this motion to go to April 29th, 2026 board meeting. And the recommendation reads that the board approves the 2026-2027 annual facilities grant expenditure plan for submission to the Ministry of Infrastructure. Okay. So unanimous report. This will go to the board with the recommendation. Next under the items for approval we have item 1.3 Sir Sanford Fleming Elementary Easement Agreement. I'll ask Jesse again to present this item. Thank you.
Thank you. So Sir Sanford Fleming Elementary School is located at West 49th and Knight Street. In May 2021, the board declared the South portion of the school property as surplus. In November 2024, a 99 year ground lease was finalized on the South parcel. A six story rental residential building has now been approved on this leased property. The lease requires the board to grant licenses and other rights reasonably requested by the tenant at no additional cost to the board to enable the development.
Vehicle access is required for the planned six-story building. The red area shown is the access location on the VSV parking lot that will provide access to the buildings below grade parking. Shared access through the Fleming School staff parking lot will limit vehicle crossing points on the sidewalk and reduce potential conflict points. There will be no loss of staff parking and this prevents unauthorized use of the staff parking area. This also allows for a continuous commercial street frontage consistent with good urban design principles.
An easement agreement is required to grant the legal right for shared access. The lease requires the board to endeavor to grant licenses and other rights reasonably requested by the tenant, and these rights would be at no additional compensation to the board. Section 3.1.2 of the board bylaw 20 requires that the board pass a bylaw authorizing the parking access easement agreement before the VSP grants such rights to the tenant.
Thank you. I just had a question around so currently my understanding is there is parking lot at the back of the property behind the field and the assumption is there is laneway or there's access off of whatever the street is there. This split that entrance into two entrances, one for the tenants of the building to drive down into their parking, or would this make a combined access point for both in which people would be driving in and going down?
So this would create a combined access point and what the city always requests of adjacent developments is that we they minimize the number of crosswalk. crossings and so vehicles whether entering our parking lot or the parkade of the new building will come across the sidewalk in one location and then divide continuing to either our parking lot or down into the sub grade of the building okay so the follow-up then and i guess this is not for jesse but for another level up i suppose so what are are we
I believe this is not a common thing for us to have. So how are we going to deal with interactions between members of the tenants and our staff in interactions that occur in that parking area. Like how are we going to protect our members from something that happens a person walking from their car and someone who is not an employee of the board whatsoever who is actually a tenant of a building that we theoretically lease to having some kind of interaction whether it's hopefully not physical but some type of interaction what's the procedure going to be to protect members thank you
I can start that perhaps so that easement agreement does set out the nature of which that space can be utilized by the tenant and so it does require them to maintain it and you know adequate care to be using it only for approved uses. But you know any interactions with members of our staff on our lands with the public would be similar in which that is an operational. on us to ensure that safeguards are in place.
OK, trustee mom. So with this access also allow for like if there's any business interests like would there be any commercial spots or parking in this easement area?
The building is mixed use and will have commercial grade. They will have commercial loading at the back, but it will be on their property. And so only the vehicle will come on to that single entry point and then turn on to this property to do any of that loading, unloading, the commercial activities. The access on through our site is simply for movement on and off to the parking.
Follow up, Trustee Mull. Yeah this is more of a comment um I I am concerned about uh having that one access point and if there's going to be businesses that will be accessing it um tenants coming in and out of the building because you know children will be walking along that sidewalk across that entryway and my concern is like what kind of safety measures will there be like I know on some In some places, there is like a post with like a flashing light or something like that to indicate that somebody's coming out of the parkade or somebody's coming out onto the main part of the street. I'm just really worried that, you know, there's going to be people coming in and out of there and kids, you know, tend to walk and run. They're pushing their bikes and mothers are pushing their strollers. And I'm just concerned that, you know... there could be a liability there.
So the design is intended to limit those risks and that if the access to the parkade came directly out onto the side street or onto the front street, you would get that more zero lot line condition where you have a vehicle coming up and straight onto the sidewalk right at the front wall of the building where the sight lines are limited. That's where you get those instances of a flashing light. There's less ability to see the approach. This will allow the vehicles to come up and turn and be in clear sight lines, have one crossing point, be able to clearly see the sidewalk and pedestrians coming and going to limit the potential for blind spots.
Go ahead Dr. Simard. Thank you.
So am I correct then is that we are basically allowing the easement to go ahead with at no cost. Like we will not be getting anything for this at all.
That is correct.
Yes and that was contemplated at the outset of the lease.
Go ahead. There's a similar situation at David Lloyd George is there not with an easement and my there's another school where there there's an easement that was there was a cost that was signed to that easement.
David Lloyd George, there was a condition for the demolition permit that we did a dedication of the property, part of the property to build a widened laneway. That was done at no cost, the dedication. So there were no funds exchanged between us and the city when that laneway dedication easement was given to the city.
DIRECTOR RIVERA- Okay seeing no further questions we'll move to the recommendation which will go to the board for April 29th 2026 board meeting and the recommendation reads that the Board of Education of School District Number 39 Vancouver serves Sanford Fleming Elementary School parking access easement by law 2026 be given three readings passed and adopted at the April 29, 2026 public board meeting. Looking at the committee members for the board. Okay. So we have trustee Young in favor and trustee Richardson in favor and Epstein. DIRECTOR RIVERA- Not in favor. Okay. And myself in favor. So this will go to the board with the recommendations from the facility planning committee in support of this motion. Okay next since there are no items for discussion we will move to section 3 information items and I will ask Jessie again sorry to present this item 3.1 new elementary school at Olympic Village update.
Thank you. So provincial funding was approved in April 2024 to enable the new school at Olympic Village to move from concept into active planning and design. McFarland-Marco Architects, MMA, were selected as the project architects, and engagement has been taking place over the past year, including technical working groups, which are advancing building systems, safety, accessibility, and sustainability. engagement with students from other vertical schools, and with the broader community through online engagement as part of the city-led Shape Your City process. Design development and permitting progressed in parallel, and this supported iterative refinements and set us up for the rezoning approval and for development permit submissions.
As a reminder, the school is being designed to accommodate 630 students and will contain four kindergarten classrooms, 22 classrooms, a library, multipurpose rooms, and a gymnasium. Four stories are required to fit the building programming on this small site.
Here you can see the design of the ground level on the left and the second floor on the right. The ground floor includes the gym, NLC space, and admin functions. The second floor includes the library and the kindergarten spaces and these can be accessed by an additional stair in the center of the building designed specifically to facilitate the kindergarten movements up from the ground floor.
Approval was needed from the City of Vancouver to increase the building height for a new four story school with rooftop play space. A public hearing took place on February 12th and included extensive engagement. 766 written submissions in favor were received, 55 opposed, and three other aspects were included in submissions. There was a high speaker turnout that resulted in council extending the session. Council reconvened on February 26, 2026 for staff questions, debate, closing remarks, and a final decision. Unanimous approval by the Vancouver City Council for the rezoning was achieved and this will enable the necessary height increase to advance.
Since that time, design development has occurred and the development permit submission is underway. This will be in progress with the city and includes updated design refinement reflecting input from the rezoning process and further technical working groups. As you can see on screen, this is the view looking to the southwest on Columbia Street with the building face facing False Creek.
The design concept is meant to respond to three fundamental drivers, the regulatory context. So to do with the zoning, the height, the massing, the physical context and the functional requirements of the school. As you can see here, the school is nested in a park like setting directly fronting onto False Creek, which is going to be an incredibly unique situation for a school.
The school has a character that is intended to be distinct from the surrounding buildings and read as a pavilion within the park. There will be flashes of color embedded onto the building to add vibrancy, and the north facade has a unique expression with a silvery faceted metal panel to evoke the surface of the Falls Creek waters. And you can see that face of the building on the top right here.
The materials of the building are incredibly important to the design. Unique rooftop element will enclose the play area on the roof. This is a component of the design that we've spent a lot of time thinking about that is going to be a very busy rooftop area with a lot of play taking place, and so containing the objects that are going to be moving around on that rooftop will be important, and so highlighting that with an architectural element has been part of the design process. There will be unique metal cladding along the majority of the building. The intention is that that metal cladding has an irregular pattern to create a variety and catch the light in different ways to reduce the sort of size of the overall scale. As noted, there will also be pops of color around some of the window elements and at the entrance points and the base of the building is a gray brick, but the brick will be patterned to create a rippling effect that's unique and interesting as you walk by it at a pedestrian scale.
So seeing here looking northeast. The current design really has that brick at the base to create a human scale and a unique roofline highlighting the transparent enclosure that is going to form the school grounds of this unique vertical school.
And just a reminder on the timeline as we continue to advance through this as noted the foundations of the projects take took place in 2024. the rezoning was filed in 2025 advancing into this year rezoning was approved in february of 2026 and development permits are now underway with the city and we will be looking at early 2027 for a construction start and fall 2029 is a projected completion and opening thank you thank you
Are there any questions related to the report?
Carl, go ahead.
It's OK, it's OK. You can go first.
OK, thank you.
First question is just a general sound. My understanding is the site of the school build is roughly about the same size, about half again as big as this park right here, right?
But. It says about 50 square meters or sorry 50 meters squared. Yeah. And the building itself would be 37-ish meters squared. 40. That's the building. Yeah. Okay. So yeah about the size of the park. And the bottom floor is going to be the office multipurpose gymnasium and one of those multipurpose rooms will be devoted to the after before and after school care. Then the library and the kindergartens are on the second floor and then what 22 classrooms in the next two floors. OK, and if I'm accurate, absolutely zero green space attached to the school.
There will be a small area at the South side of the school. There is some parking provided and there is some outdoor space, but as as you mentioned, it is very limited.
Alright, so thank you. I guess that's the the the concern I've got from a staff perspective is that at this point. Any interaction with nature is an off school site field trip. So that means everything anytime you want to take kids into nature, you're it's a field trip. You can't go in. There's no field. There's no sports field. There's nothing that you can do in this school that doesn't require a field trip.
So this situation isn't dissimilar from other sites currently operating. So Crosstown in which the school grounds is located on park board property but is utilized by the school during the day. There is no exclusive license for the use of that space. It is ultimately a park. We will have a similar condition in the new Seaside Elementary School in which the outdoor space again will be park board public property with no exclusive license for the use of that space. This is surrounded by Hinge Park, which does provide some play elements. There is the green space to the north. And, you know, as students, as we were touring the site identified for us, there is Habitat Island and the actual waterfront, which is a really unique area to be able to engage with.
yeah so the the follow-up though that was is that but the liability then of there's no actual on there's no place for a teacher to take the students that would be on and that's the precedent i see is why i'm bringing it up so we now have three schools in which the their liability is now left with the teacher for taking students on a field trip when they want to engage outside of the classroom that's not in the city is that accurate
So from my understanding, we don't have the associate superintendent or the director of instruction here. There are no field study trip forms required for students across town to access that park space and that outdoors. It is part of their operating space on a daily basis. If they wanted to take the students further afield, as many of our schools do, then you would need to work through those processes. But this is being the existing process that we've had at Crosstown. We have that very close relationship with the Park Board City and others to work through this process. We're working through a very similar process for the new site where Seaside will be, and this will be similar. The difference that we did in this plan actually was to activate the roof. So there is a large opportunity. And the other thing that we know from the engagement with the students, although I was not present, but read a lot of the reports and heard about it, is the students live in this urban environment and they're already used to child cares, play spaces, et cetera, being on the roofs of the buildings, but also in their neighborhoods. So this is a bit of a reality of building schools in an urban center. Um, but it has been something that is being addressed in those school communities already. Thank you.
Last I promise.
Follow.
Yeah, go ahead. Um, yeah, so that's, I guess what I'm trying to get. So this is me coming as a PE teacher of decades, uh, that taking my students out onto our school grounds to engage outside is not something that requires anything other. I don't have to check in the office to do it. That's my PE class. We go outside.
this so the issue i see is that taking students outside at this school is a field trip because you will be leaving school ground point of order this has been addressed i i i feel like this has been addressed that's not the case fault creek elementary uses play area that is not school property crosstown seaside I don't know if there's something we are not aware of that you can share with us why this is going to be.
Then happily then. So the issue I'm looking for here is are we? Are we creating a situation like? Is the trustees and the senior management team aware or or prepared then to write off liability for staff who at this site will be required if they cross the sidewalk and go into the park? Who has responsibility for the kids at that point?
We'll get Flavia to answer on this, please.
So this is a situation that we have addressed throughout the district. As the chairperson of the board stated and the superintendent, this is nothing new. We have shared sites with the city and other organizations throughout our school district. Specific policies and procedures apply to our safe operation of schools. We do have safety plans in place at each school that guide the work of teachers and how we expect teachers to report to the office or anywhere else. The same procedures will apply to this site. Anything that is unique to this site, as we bring the site into operations, we will create specific site specific plans that will ensure the safety and also ensure that of everybody that works or attends that school and also will ensure that everybody is fully knowledgeable on what the requirements are and what the expectations are and what like who is responsible for different activities that may occur on school grounds or on city grounds or like if and if a field trip a walking field trip form is required because Maybe they want to take a longer trip than what is considered regular in that area. Then that is going to be communicated to the teachers and the principals and everybody will be in the know as the school becomes operational.
DIRECTOR RIVERA- Thank you. I'm just going to actually ask a question in regards to parking. Is it paid parking or is it available for the staff.
It will be dedicated to staff parking, accessibility parking, and the required loading for the site.
Thank you. Trustee Ma?
In the presentation, you showed a picture of classrooms. That's not in our package. Is it possible to get that? It was I think the second or third slide was the different floors, right? Yeah, of the different floors. The layout.
Yes, we the presentation will be appended.
Trust young. Thank you for the presentation. Do you have any information on that? West side dog area. Is that? Is that planning to stay? It's a little fenced in gravel area. Is that going to stay the same?
So Hinge Park, which is to the west of the site, has been designed and developed. The dog park will remain the same, but there is the future properties on... the between Canby Bridge and the dog park that are future development sites for the city. Those do include significant amount of park spaces, including what is envisioned to be play fields that will ultimately complement this school and this neighborhood. Follow up. Do you have a timeline for when those plan to be developed? We do not. And that would be a question for the city.
Trustee Richardson.
Thank you, Chair. I have a question and an inquiry. The question is the timeline of 30 months seems tight for a building of this size, given this is larger than, say, Henry Hudson. I trust that, you know, in terms of city and all that, I just note, and I'm sure you're... more than aware that 30 months seems tight, but I know we've been waiting since 1986 for that. I mean, so we don't want to wait much longer.
We have been working weekly with the city to ensure that the rezoning and the development permit could take place concurrently, that the development permit and building permits are being considered concurrently. and looking at staged processes so that we're able to undertake early works and make sure that timeline can stay that tight.
Follow up or it's another inquiry. I had an inquiry, I guess it was during the lead up to the to the city council presentations by the local residents, and they just I trust that that we have communications with, and I don't know, I think they referred to them as a name, but the general community there, I take it we are notifying them of this report and we will keep them informed as we proceed towards completion.
yes and there was broad communications put out by the city through the shape your city website in which there was an open call for questions and responses provided and then collection of all of the correspondence to council there will be further signage put up on site indicating the advancement of the development permit and we continue to have our website being updated internally with updates on the design and ways to contact staff
Go ahead, Trustee Richardson.
As a follow-up, very similar, I guess, to Robert's annex. I noticed that there, there's an existing space, our space, where there is a communications where updates for the neighbors just wandering by can, so that would be, I think, useful for those neighbors that are most engaged. Thank you.
Trustee Ma. Following up on what you had asked, in terms of parking, how many slots in total?
There's four slots south of the building and accessible parking only. Sorry, accessible parking only and loading docks.
There are no parking stalls for staff. It is only accessible parking and loading docks for the garbage and recycling.
Trustee Fraser. Thank you. In the presentation, you showed how there would be bricks of the lower level in, I can't remember, like wavy forms. I'm thinking of my children and they may contemplate that that is a climbing wall. Is that something that's been thought of during the design process?
Yes, we've been looking at what is a sort of feasible level of recessing the bricks or having them protrude that doesn't make them a climbable surface. We have other examples, Tennyson, in which we have brick articulation that adds a lot of texture and quality without it becoming a climbing wall.
Sorry, Jess, can you turn off your mic, please? Thank you. I just have one question in regards to parking. I think we were a little confused before. So there's actually no parking for staff. And what are the staff that are, you know, they're commuting every single day. Would they be paying for their own parking? Or how's that going to work?
Correct. There is no staff parking being provided. It is a highly accessible site in close proximity to rapid transit, to AAA cycling facilities, and higher density residential. So it is a walkable location to be able to have families, students, and employees arrive at by cycling, walking, and transit.
Trustee Young. I have a question around alternate transportation and bike locks and we've had some questions around some of our schools and what that will look like I know as secondary schools usually have something in place but what will be in place for us there. So there will be significant amount of bike racks integrated along Columbia Street and along the other building faces. This will meet the City of Vancouver parking bylaw requirements. It will be a substantial amount of bike racks and they will be directly associated with the bike lanes that are anticipated to also be running adjacent to the site not planning for a bike cage like we saw constructed at hamburg recently carl yeah thank you um just as a follow-up to the
lack of parking, I suppose. Does the district have any sense of how many staff currently commute by bike or would commute by bike or how many commute not by car and would be considering commuting by not by car and who would want to walk to this site? Or so do we have any sense of who's going to work here?
The school is not constructed, not staffed yet. I'm sure that the employees that will consider working at this site will be fully aware of the parking conditions available and they will make their choices based on the specific conditions that this school will offer.
Trustee Young. Just one last comment. I think this is timely. We are now in a, we cannot move out with our infrastructure. We must move up. And I think that's great that we are, attempting to change a culture of driving. So I commend you. I know that we are restricted by space, but I also think it's a great and innovative way to adapt to what's happening globally and and right here at home. So thank you for that.
Any other comments or questions trust you.
So getting back to the bike racks, You said that they'll, how close will they be to the school? Will they be right next to the school?
We're still working through the landscape design plan, but they are looking at being tucked adjacent to the school. This building does have to be raised up by a little over a meter because of the floodplain level. So there is a lot of grade changes that need to be navigated with ramps and stairs to make it welcoming and accessible. So the bike racks are being fit in where they're visible, where it's feasible to walk a bike to and from a bike lane and where we have good sight lines to be able to see those secured locations.
I would just say that if we are expecting that people will be biking or walking or rolling, that we have sufficient bike racks and of different sizes, too, because, you know, we've got little people bikes and big people bikes and The other issue is you know if people if families bring strollers and things like that because the building is still going to be so tight that there should be spots.
DIRECTOR RIVERA- Thank you. Any other questions or comments.
I just want to say I can't wait for the school to come to life and. the impact that's going to make on the community, the children and the families who are waiting for the school for many, many years. So thank you so much for that.
So we have addressed all the items on the agenda and we now adjourn the meeting. Thank you, everyone. We are adjourned at 8.02 p.m. Thank you.