Amendment to Add Retail Centres Review – Villages

I've got an amendment to the amendment, please Right amendment to the amendment, please go ahead councillor.

Thanks I'll just read it out. I'm not sure exactly where it can be added most appropriately, but it's further that council directs staff to commence a review of zoning around existing retail centres in the established neighbourhood centres with a view to bolstering the health of existing retail and improving community connectedness, walkability and the availability of more accessible and affordable housing options. Now, the reason why I've proposed that is because our existing retail we all value very much. And, I mean, I personally find it very sad and depressing when I lose my beloved independent businesses from around the downtown peninsula where I live and in the West End. And, you know, we heard clearly from staff that the additional customers does help bolster and ensure the good health of local businesses, ensuring local employment and community connectedness. And I think we've got an opportunity. I suspect that the Villagers Plan itself is going to be voted down as a result of the intention to sever in the... Councillor Kirby-Young's amendment. But I think this is an opportunity for us to address one of the concerns raised by speakers, that they're worried about competition with existing retail in the Villages Plan. Now, I think this Council got it back to front and that we should have perhaps suggested a body of work around bolstering existing retail and looking at zoning around existing retail areas rather than prioritising the villagers' plan because of how much staff time it's taken up. You know, I know that it was an election promise by the majority and I know that it's... since been prioritised a number of times, but I think it's a real gap that we haven't done much planning work around existing retail. So this amendment is to deliver more density in customers, therefore customers, to our existing retail to help them deal with things like online shopping, tariffs, the state of the economy, how much... people's income they have to put into housing and how little they have left over to spend at their local shops. So we have secured rental policy along the arterials, but we don't have a specific body of work concentrating on existing retail. So I hope that council will vote in favour of this amendment.

Thank you. Councillor Orr.

Thanks. Just maybe a point of information through the chair to the mover of the amendment. Just a little confused as to the placement of this particular amendment in terms. So this would be, would this be a new letter or would this be under M? So we're amending the amendment, which adds M and severs the rest. So would this qualify as an amendment to an amendment or would this be an amendment to the main queue? I'm just a little confused at the placement.

Can I ask that point of information possibly through the chair to the staff of where the best placement would be an extra letter?

Okay. That's all my questions. Thanks for the clarification. Thank you.

Councillor Bligh.

Yeah, thanks very much and appreciate the amendment being brought forward by Councillor Maloney. I think that the assumptions on sort of where decisions are going to land today makes this amendment timely and appropriate. And I think, you know, it's not to be prescriptive about what those outcomes look like. It's to continue some of the work, the citywide work, around how we are going to grow as a city. And I appreciate looking at the review of zoning around existing retail centers, recognizing that we do have areas that have thriving retail, we have areas that have struggling retail, and we have areas with no retail. And so there is a lot of nuance to this. And I think some of the objection I heard with the villages plan is just the sort of homogenous nature of the policy itself, risking some of the nuances that actually are how people experience local serving retail in their neighborhoods. We aren't sort of a vast, geographically vast city. Our city is highly walkable. We can access retail as it stands right now. What I hear from customers is what they want is more, or from retail and businesses, are more customers. And I also hear from people who would like more options to... have street access like townhomes with rental and multi-unit development above them and not just have to have retail on arterials. And so whether it's through setbacks or urban design sort of parameters, there's an opportunity to create more street-level residential, which I don't think we should take off the table entirely because that too... lends to livability and housing choices. And at the end of the day, can sort of offer some support to the existing retail that needs more customers at the end of the day. And in doing so, will evolve the offering of the various retailers. Because one of the things that's not identified in the Villages Plan is there's no way for us to manage or... sort of dictate whether we want to or not, and I'm not suggesting we do want to, whether or not they're multinational chain businesses that move in or whether or not they're dentists. Nothing against dentists. We all need them. But, like, maybe they're better on a second floor. Maybe that's not the kind of experience, public realm experience we're trying to create. And so there's nothing in the Villages Plan that stopped... that from happening and we do see it happening across the city already you know uh public like some sort of health whether it's dentists or physio what have you they're very stable they're usually better funded than a a risky small business that's opening a cafe but the cafe or something like that the grocery store has is offering something very different and unique to residents across the city so I think in my ramblings, perhaps, about how I want to support this motion is because it just feels like there's a lot more work to do. to make sure that we strike the right balance. And I don't want this work to end. I think it needs to continue because we have existing opportunities across our city where more residents and better support for existing retail and then making sure retail exists where it is not currently in the five pilot areas that were highlighted by staff are not identified in here, but I suspect will be part of that future work. So again, all that to say, that's part of my closing remarks on the villages plan itself, but... I support this amendment for those reasons.

Thank you. Councillor Dominato.

Thanks, Mayor. I move to sever O, the amendment to the amendment, as part of the vote.

So do we have to, sorry, do we have to vote on O first?

Or are we just going to deal with it? Okay. Thank you.