Vancouver City Council meeting of Wednesday, July the 29th, 2026, reconvening from July the 28th, 2026. This meeting is being held in person by electronic means. Council members and the public may participate by either method. Any members joining electronically are reminded to enable their video to confirm quorum. This meeting is being live streamed on the city's website and YouTube. Meeting progress will be updated on X and threads at Van City Clerk. So due to new posting limits, updates will only cover essential items such as vote results. Speakers are encouraged to monitor the live stream to track meeting progress. But please note there is a slight delay. Call in or arrive soon after receiving your reminder email so you are ready when your name is called. In case of an emergency requiring an evacuation, there are two exits located. Beyond the glass doors and to the left, if the glass doors are blocked, please use one of the four additional exits in this chamber here. Do not use the elevator, use the stairs instead. If you require assistance, please stay where you are and one of our incredibly friendly security team members will help you to a safe location. Also, a defibrillator is available at the end of the hallway just outside these doors here. I do want to acknowledge that we're hosting today's council meeting on the traditional territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and TTsleil-Waututh First Nations, and I do want to thank them for their generosity, hospitality, and love and care. They show this great land that we get to live or can play on. I also want to acknowledge the incredible contributions of all of our team members throughout the city of Vancouver who work incredibly hard every single day with passion to make our city a better place for everyone. And so with that, if we can please have a roll call.

Present.

Present.

Present.

Great, and I just want to note that Councillor Dominato is here as well.

Thank you. Okay, so the plan for today, we're going to recess at noon for lunch, followed by the in-camera meeting. Return at 1.30 p.m. to continue to deal with the remainder of the agenda. Adjourn or recess by 5 p.m. as there is minimal quorum after 5 p.m. If we recess, the reconvene date is Thursday, July 30, 2026 at 9.30 a.m. Reports. At the council meeting yesterday, council dealt with unfinished business 1 through 4. Reports 1 through 5, 7 through 11, 13, 15, 17, 20, 22.

Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes that they have a conflict, I don't see anyone's hands up.

And I do not see, oh, here we go. Councillor Meiszner, thank you.

Yeah, thanks, Mayor. It's a question for staff. I understand that the term is initially 15 years. Is that correct? Am I reading that correctly? Or apologies, I may actually be looking at the...

What is the term? Apologies.

Thanks, Mash.

Speaker number five, Alan Bernard Fernandez.

Okay. Okay. Speaker number four, Noelle Marfil. Okay.

No, not on the line.

Yes, I'll be brief. I just want to thank all our speakers for being here today and for speaking so eloquently in support of this lease. I think that this is a fantastic location for you in the interim. It's downtown in the library. I mean, there's tons of people moving about. You'll have a lot of visibility, and I know that you'll be welcoming in everyone from the community, regardless of whether or not they're Filipino or not. So I'm really excited to come visit you, and I hope that you'll be cooking up some delicious Filipino food as well, as I'm sure that'll be part of the program. So I'm very supportive of this, and I'm excited to see it move ahead, and even more excited to see you move into your permanent space in the coming years. So thanks for being here. Thank you very much. Councillor Kirby Young.

Yeah, thanks, Mayor. I just want to acknowledge and appreciate all of our speakers for speaking but coming in person and for a council meeting that was held over for several days. And so I know that your time was fluid, but you felt it was very important your voices represented. And I believe that that is because... you recognize that this is a very important moment along the journey and the way towards realizing the long-awaited dream of a Filipino cultural center. And I think that having an interim space is reflective and speaks to keeping the dream alive. It's tangible. I think one of the speakers referenced that it's an opportunity. to continue to grow and build the community and involve people along that journey and towards the dream. And that's really important that people feel part of it. But it is also, I think it gives, it makes it tangible and it makes it real that it's actually happening. It's not a concept, but there is genuinely a path forward towards that. And so I'm really happy to support it. And nothing is more inspiring, I think, than community leadership for people that are doing something that will last beyond your own generation. I used to work with somebody that called it cathedral thinking. You know, sometimes people use the analogy of planting a tree or building the cathedral that will stand for generations, or you may not stand under the shade of that tree, but that is genuinely what you are doing. And so I just wanted to acknowledge that, and I know that this is a moment that people will talk about when the center is realized and they tell their community members and their kids and their grandkids the stories of how it happened. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Councillor Clausen. Yeah, I'll be brief, and I would also like to acknowledge everyone who came in and called in today to speak. I'm not surprised that folks have come in here. There has been a... a spirit of determination around having a dedicated Filipino cultural amenity in this city for quite some time, decades. And so we've been, it's been our pleasure to sort of be able, sort of sharing that journey and trying to kind of move things forward. And I am, I think that the space itself is going to be great, is going to be activated well. I think it will have the aromas of good food and also just of community. And so I think that, again, the ultimate goal is obviously a dedicated space in the city of Vancouver, but to have an interim space that we can pull up together really much more quickly for community to gather, for other parts of the city to join you. in celebration is something that i truly look forward to and i want to just thank you all for being such true champions for the community and in terms of trying to make this happen so thanks very much happy to support this thank you councillor dominato

Thanks, Mayor. And I'll echo the comments of my colleagues. And starting first, Mabel, you've been stalwart and really leading the charge on this. And so thank you for that, for your leadership. To all of you who spoke, thank you for being here and really making the commitment to voice. what this brings to the community. I think it's really important, as we've heard in the past, we have some established communities who already have their cultural centers in the city, and it means a tremendous amount to have that space to gather, to celebrate, whether it's cooking, as many of you alluded to, because apparently we're all thinking about food this morning. But... but also in celebration arts and culture. But really, it comes down to being about community. And I know that this has been a longstanding dream, desire to have a space where the community can come together. And so I think this is a great first step. And I think it is a fantastic location in terms of being accessible as well. It's on public transit. And so really happy to be part of this journey with you. And so congratulations. And I'll leave my comments there, Mayor.

Yeah, I just wanted to pipe in and offer my congratulations on this achievement. And as the council liaison to the Vancouver Public Library, I just want to also... acknowledge that this is a fantastic use of what was kind of an underutilized space. And the connection between libraries as this third space and a gathering place for people of all cultures and interests and a place for people to convene, the connection there is not lost on me. And I think it's a wonderful opportunity. And I hope that there is an opportunity to actually engage with the central branch and maybe even... see how you can coordinate some programming together and just sort of increase that visibility and connection and togetherness. So congratulations. And wow, this is happening quickly too. I just realized what the date is for occupancy. This is, I imagine we'll be seeing something happening very soon. Congrats.

Thank you very much and congratulations. Okay. So we are going to jump. Can we take a two-minute recess?

So before we begin, does anybody have a conflict that they need to disclose? Seeing none, this item does have a presentation. And we do have team members here to present the item.

Sure.

Seconded. Awesome. Any discussion? All in favor, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Great. We will waive their presentation. I know it would have been fabulous. Thank you. Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Okay. Well, council members, you have up to five minutes to ask questions of team members and the applicant. Are there any questions? Councillor Meiszner. Oh, sorry. I was on the queue to move, so thank you. I'm good. Please remove me. Would someone like to move a motion? Great. I think Councillor Domonato seconded that first. Council is nearing discussion. This is item number 12. Okay. Well, seeing that, I'm going to call the vote. Councillor Kirby-Young, we're good? We're good? We're good? Okay. I'm going to call the vote.

And that passes unanimously.

So the next item is item number 14, because 13 was approved on consent. Before we begin the agenda item, any conflicts to disclose? No? Okay. This item, once again, has a presentation.

And we do have team members here to present, unless someone would like to waive the presentation. Councillor Zhou? seconded by Councillor Klassen. Councillor, is there any discussion?

Okay. All those in favour, say aye. Aye. All those opposed, say nay. One nay, and the rest are in favour. So we will waive the presentation. Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Sorry, Councillor Domenetto, were you...

Sorry, Mayor, I don't mean to interrupt. I just want, because we're moving quickly through these reports, and that up there says 1750 is up behind. Is that the correct one?

No, we're on item 14 now, right now.

Yeah, so we just need to give our clerks, I think, a chance to update what items we're on.

Yeah. I'll slow it down a little bit. So we're so excited it's the last day.

Okay. So... We are on item 14, CD-1 rezoning, 1031 through 1039 Burnaby Street. We're all good? Okay, great. And move it to the main queue.

So would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay, council members, you have up to five minutes to ask questions of team members and the applicant. And there are questions. So, Councillor Dominato.

Thanks, Mary. Two questions to staff, noting the relaxations included around shadowing in exchange for social housing. Could you just comment on that further and the relaxations, the shadowing relaxations, what the impacts are for Davie Village? And then I have a second question after that. So start with that one. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. I appreciate a little bit of that detail.

And I'm not sure if this may be a question for staff, but also for the applicant. I'm curious, with the secure 20% of the residential floor area for social housing, is there any contemplation of a particular demographic that's targeted for the social housing, or is it just generally... Capturing social housing under our definition of social housing and generally being kind of below market, a rental, but is there a particular group that we're looking to serve in the context of social housing, seniors, women with children, anything in that? Could you offer any additional information?

Thank you.

applicants and then come back and report back to city staff so right now we don't have an answer to that we're going to work to that but it's going to be very delicate to find the financing for that airspace parcel subdivision right okay that's helpful context particularly given that um the relaxations are being offered to accommodate that you know the social housing i think i think it's helpful to have that additional context um because it is difficult for um uh particularly for not-for-profits to finance these things so um i appreciate that thank you

Thank you, Councillor Frye. Yeah, similar questions and reflecting on this letter that we had received from VRS specifically on this project and their concerns about ensuring that the social housing component is intact. Can staff explain how, in the absence of an actual specific operator, this will be guaranteed as social housing? Is this through a covenant on the title?

Prior to occupancy. So, OK, and that gets around, I'm assuming, the financing issue? that the applicant was talking about? Okay. So maybe, and if I could just then, just to get some clarity with this. So through this, you're able to finance the project entirely, and then it doesn't involve the social housing not-for-profit financing it.

Would you like me to take a stab at answering?

Okay. I appreciate the answer and appreciate the complexity on this. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

That's all my questions. Thank you, Councillor Claussen. Yeah, thanks very much, Mayor. So I have some questions here, perhaps for staff. So when staff recommended the additional height and density, was it on the understanding that BRS communities would purchase and operate the social housing component?

So based on that answer, presumably staff weren't aware that VRS communities intended to pursue senior government funding to deepen affordability?

Okay. Did the city assess or place any limits on the purchase price of social housing units given that their value was created by the city's grant of additional height and density?

Okay. I suppose for either our EFM or our planning staff here, what protections are in place to ensure the public benefit of the additional density is preserved? since the operator is no longer the nonprofit partner.

Okay. And does the city have any replacement nonprofit, any assurances that the replacement nonprofit will provide the same affordability, accessibility, and shared care programming that was proposed in the original proposal?

Okay. Maybe I'll sort of close out with this question. If the affordability outcomes or operating model are ultimately less than was contemplated when the application was originally evaluated, what mechanisms does the city have to require an equivalent public benefit?

Essentially, we're looking to see what mechanisms does the city have to require the equivalent public benefit given what has transpired is ultimately less when originally the application was being evaluated.

Thanks very much. You know, I'll just state that I think that there's obviously some public benefit, and the project, I think, will be a strong one. But ultimately, we are providing additional density that really should be given towards that public benefit, and I'm sure that between the applicant and staff that we'll get to a very good place for that. Thanks very much. Councillor, we're out of time.

Thank you. Okay. Seeing no one else in the queue, would someone like to move a motion? Great. That was Councillor Blighth first, seconded by Councillor Claassen. Council, is there any discussion?

Seeing no one in the queue. Give it one more sec. Okay.

Okay, so item 15 was approved on consent. So item 16, we have CD-1 rezoning 8530 through 8550 Canby Street. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to declare it. Does anybody have a conflict? This item does have a presentation, and we do have team members here to present the item. Someone wants to waive it. Great. Councillor Bligh seconded by Councillor Meiszner. Any discussion? All in favour say aye.

All those opposed say nay.

Great.

That passes. So thank you very much. Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Okay. Council, you do have up to five minutes to ask questions. Are there any questions from team members?

Yeah, I just have a few questions on, you know, the site being near the transfer station and, you know, sort of what has been done around to sort of mitigate any concerns around noise, you know, potential obviously odor from the transfer station, traffic concerns with dumpsters pulling in and out of there, just general concerns around the proximity to that. Anything?

And then maybe a question for housing. Just a little bit on, I think maybe there was a similar application the other day, but on unit turnover rents in the below market units may be re-indexed to 10%, less the citywide average market rent by unit type. Just sort of for the public record, just to go over why that is.

Right. No, I knew it wasn't under the relief program, but it sort of is a way to kind of... I wouldn't say mimic that, but sort of get to the same results of that program by negotiating the CAC?

Okay, that's all my questions. I see others on the queue.

Thank you very much, Councillor Maloney.

I was just interested to know, will the existing interim bike lane on Canby Street along the frontage of the development be upgraded?

Great. And will there be any measures incorporated into the development to encourage residents to use the SkyTrain rather than driving or to at least facilitate that choice?

Right. Thanks very much.

Thank you.

Councillor Claassen.

Yeah, just a quick question on this project that I know that there were some very early discussions surrounding the fact that this was on employment categorized under the regional growth strategy as employment lands. I presume that all of that business in relation to Metro Vancouver is all clear and clean. We don't need to go back for any decisions, I assume.

Very good. Okay. And I just heard of it at a higher level. We've seen a Marine Gateway become this... rather substantial neighborhood expanding with obviously lots of density surrounding the Canada Line station. But it does lack for, I think, outdoor and community amenities in the area. Is it possible to sort of just touch upon how that will be ultimately addressed? Of course, I brought forward the motion to try and to have a pathway along the Kent Avenue. I don't think that's moving forward quickly right now, but I'm sort of curious where we're going to be able to sort of accommodate some of this population that's coming into that neighborhood over the long term.

And just in, again, sort of thinking long-term here, is there going to be more available access to the waterfront on the Fraser River, for example?

Okay. And I know that the major transit hub for the buses is going to be fully built out to that area there, which means that there's going to be not only a lot of buses going back and forth, but a lot of employees going back and forth. Are we going to make sure that pedestrian and other sort of traffic safety are kind of key in terms of how we develop that neighborhood?

Okay. Thank you. And no updates yet on any of the Kent Avenue rail right away at this time, right?

uh that i don't know um it's okay i can i can refer the question to engineering thank you very much okay thank you that's my question sir thank you very much counselor fry yeah um i mean this is a remarkably complex project there's a lot of heavy lifting that this project's doing with the context to industrial land and obviously housing and um Curious, and just lifting off some of Councillor Klassen's questions, how has the connectivity for, because it's not a very pedestrian-friendly area, it's not especially human-friendly right now, and so how does this expression kind of foster good planning and good connectivity for people as far as connecting to Marine Gateway number one and so forth?

So... And further to that, where does the responsibility of the applicant to design some of this... And where does it begin with the city to meet them with some of that?

But that park, it is public?

Right, okay. Great, and then just this is more of a broad question. Specific to the changes to this land use, I recall a few years ago we had a similar application just to the east of Marine Gateway on Marine Drive, or there was certainly some interest around that. Are we seeing a change as a result of new transit-oriented area legislation that's going to enable more of that kind of mixed development where it wasn't before?

And when we, obviously this includes some industrial, and are we very, like how is the thought process to the inclusion of industrial and what kind of industrial it is that is conducive to human habitation?

And when we talk about last mile distribution and the operational side of that, obviously a lot of this is moving into 24-hour space. Do we contemplate how that integrates with people's life?

Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Okay. Would someone like to move a motion? Great. Councillor Fry, uh, seconded by Councillor Klassen. Council, is there any discussion?

Councillor Meiszner? Yeah, thanks.

I'll be quick. Um, I am very supportive of this project. I think, um, it's a great project. It's never really made sense to me previously how, uh, Marine Gateway, which is a really successful community, um, just to the North, um, was able to be built. Uh, and, and this wasn't, and I know that, um, there's been some policy shifts and different things that have happened that have allowed this to come forward. But this is an ideal location, I think, for 1,000 units of rental housing right next to the Canada line, 20% of below market, child care facility, senior center, two levels of industrial, so really replacing what's there, and just adding housing on top of that, which I'm supportive of. So... I'm excited to see this move forward, and I think that it's going to help complete that community at Marine Drive Canada Line. There's going to be a pedestrian bridge that connects from the existing shopping area that's there to this new development. So I just think this is a great thing to see happening at this station, so I'm fully in support. Thanks. Thank you, Councillor Claston.

Yeah, just really quick as well, echoing a bit of what Councillor Meiser just said, very supportive of this project. But if you could tell by the nature of my questions, we are very quickly building a brand new neighborhood that abuts our industrial land, our heavy industrial, and I mean in terms of warehousing, truck use, and what have you. And so livability is at risk if we don't think about how we're going to be able to support You know, thousands of new residents are going to be coming into a neighborhood who simply want to go for a walk at night or ride their bikes in place or go for an evening jog. This is a place that's not terribly conducive to that, and I know that the long-term planning for the Kent Street transfer station is to move it, and ultimately that will add to some of the, I think, overall sort of quality of life in the area. But the... The considerations that staff and City Hall really needs to think about is over the long term how we make sites like this a part of a more complete neighborhood, and that's why... Ultimately, when we look at things like the Kent Avenue Rail right away as potentially being an active transportation pathway to connect both people going to work and also just recreating in the community. And again, we're sort of pushing the boundaries here a little bit, but this is a decision that I'm happy to support and look forward to seeing this neighborhood evolve. We'll always be keeping one eye on how we make it improve the livability of Marine Gateway over the long term. Thanks very much.

Thank you, Councillor Fry.

Yeah, as I stated earlier, this really is a remarkable project that does a lot of heavy lifting. I mean, it's 1,000 units of rental housing with 20% below market. The senior center, the daycare center, the park, it is quite remarkable. And the connectivity to the existing shops and services at Marine Gateway obviously is going to be a great asset. to the new residents, but also to support those businesses at Marine Gateway. I do think that, you know, and to Councilman Classen's point as well, I think that there is some broader thinking around what the area planning for this part of town is going to look like, ultimately, because I think that, you know, as we start to evolve the amount of density that we're seeing here, it will require a little bit more placemaking and a little bit more thoughtful kind of considerations around how this is a community beyond just the confines of the actual built form, but how it extends into the streets and neighborhoods and all those other pieces that make communities work. But really, it's a big deal, and it's funny that we sort of just slide these in now without a big public hearing or a big foo-for-all, but this is a pretty significant project, and I'm happy to support it. Thank you very much.

That passes unanimously. And that completes item number 16. That was 16. Thank you. Okay.

So... We do have a request to vary the agenda. So our team members have requested that council consider reports 25 and 26 before the break today. The rest of the reports would be dealt with in the regular order of business. Would someone like to move a motion to vary the agenda to consider reports 25 and 26 immediately? I think Councillor Dominato seconded by Councillor Misner. A reminder that the motion requires two-thirds support. All those in favour say yay. Yay. All those opposed say nay. That passes with the required majority, and council will now consider reports 25 and 26. Okay, so item 25, rezoning 906 through 982 West 18th Avenue, 907 through 975 West 19th Avenue, and 3403 through 3415 Laurel Street. commonly known as 966 West 18th Avenue, the Belfort Block. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes that they have a conflict of interest, now's the time to disclose it. Not seeing anyone's hands up. This item does have a presentation, and we do have team members here to present the item.

NEW SPEAKER Oh, my God.

NEW SPEAKER Good day, mayor and council.

Thank you very much. Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Thank you very much. Council, you have up to five minutes to ask questions of team members and the applicant. Councillor Meiszner.

Yeah, thanks. First question is for the applicant around the park. I noted the park has been reduced in size. I'm just curious as to why you want to position it on the corner of Laurel and 19th as opposed to maybe somewhere in the middle of the site.

Okay. And the linear park previously contemplated, was that larger than this parcel?

Okay. Thanks for that. I think Josh is going to provide more info.

Okay. So it kind of makes it seem bigger or it is bigger because it'll have the sidewalk area. Correct. Okay. Okay. Thanks for that. Appreciate that. And then my other question was for, I guess, probably the applicant as well. What's a front and back duplex? I don't know what that is. Is that a multiplex? Is that a four?

Okay.

Okay. And what's the square footage of these units?

Like under 2,000 square feet? Yeah.

Yeah.

So larger, larger family size. Three bedroom units. Yeah. Okay. Okay. That's it for me. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, counselor or.

Yeah, definitely have some concerns around the loss of BMR and the tenants that won't be eligible. So obviously some tenants have moved in since 2021. That's a long time, five years. Is there nothing that is, or maybe is it part of the TRPP review in terms of some sort of... thing where this is re-triggering like a review of the tenants. If nothing is done in five years, these people now are part of the neighborhood, part of the community, feel close to their neighbors and now won't get any of those protections. Is there anything in the TRPP review that is going to address this?

Thank you, Councillor, for the question. We will relay that question to our housing team to answer.

Okay, that's good to know, but I guess that doesn't give these people any sort of comfort.

I'm glad that it's going to be looked at in the future. Do we know how staff are communicating with those tenants in terms of what the process looks like?

For people who may find this relocation very difficult, even if they don't comply with the TRPP, are we still in contact with them? Are we still talking to them about their options?

And then this is kind of probably a difficult question to answer on the spot, but I mean, what percentage of new rental units would be affordable to households earning Vancouver's median renter income?

Yeah, for sure. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, a question about the childcare facility. Is it just sort of being completely dropped or is there any sort of replacement site being looked at or, you know, something through the CAC, anything like that? Is it just gone?

Okay.

Again, so, yeah, some questions on the park. It shrunk from 566 to 374. I know Councillor Meiszner asked some questions around that. So that means it still meets the ODP's intent. And then also as a follow-up question, if the park board was consulted in sort of losing park space.

Seeing nods.

Okay. Again, just sort of around the process of how this is sort of referred, rather than being, you know, like a public hearing, you know, this is not consistent with the Canby Corridor plans below market target. The park and childcare commitments as well aren't being carried forward.

Why is this being recommended as approved in principle? and not, you know, either refer to a public hearing or even like sort of, you know, further revisions back to staff?

I'm very happy for you to complete that question.

Thanks. And I'd like to ask, A couple of questions of the applicant. Obviously the loss of the below market housing and the childcare and the density is very disappointing. Was there thoughts towards selling the site and how possible was that?

Thanks. That's very helpful. And with these changes, is it likely that the project, as the revised project, will proceed any time soon?

Thank you very much, Councillor Bligh.

Yeah, thanks very much. I just wanted to verify reading through related to the tenants, and this is for the applicant. It seems to me that with the 2022 rezoning approval, tenants came in, and my assumption, Evan, is that they sort of knew that it was an act of rezoning, and then there would be... potentially a future rezoning. So as opposed to, I guess, how transparent with you were you with those tenants when they took occupancy that they knew that there was an active rezoning?

Well, that was going to be my second question. So thank you for answering that. And they have the ability to move back in. As part of the phasing, it looks like there's an opportunity for tenants to sort of move back in or sort of the disruption to the tenants is less because of the phasing approach.

Okay. The lots two through nine, can you just clarify, will they all be fee simple? Yes.

And the rental will be in lot one, the RR2B? Correct. Yeah. recognizing that the proposed park is a community benefit. How did you decide, or how was it, and maybe staff will want to comment on this, just the trade-off with the child care, the opportunity with child care, given that there are parks close by. I just wonder, did it come down to the mathematics of the deal itself? You know, yeah, I'd just like to better understand, because child care, of course, especially with family-oriented units like this, would just be an absolute game-changer, I would suggest. And so I'm disappointed to see that it's not continuing, but I'd like to understand more as to why.

Okay. Can I hear from staff as well in terms of how council can support continue to focus and target for childcare and what would have been required on this site. Hypothetically, we can, I'm okay to sort of speak in general terms, but I just want to understand because, yeah, there's a trade-off here and it's a decision to be made. And we do have the ability to ask for childcare, but we just need to know what the ask would actually be.

Okay. All right. I'll leave it there. Thanks.

Thank you very much. Okay. Would someone like to move the motion?

Councillor Claassen, thank you. Councillor Domonato seconded. Council, is there any discussion?

Councillor Bligh?

Yeah, thanks very much. I appreciate the process that has been undertaken by our staff and the applicant over many years to get to this point. I'll just speak... Very briefly on it. I think it's the kind of density that we are looking for in this area, dental density, as well as the rental opportunity on the RR2B lot or lot one with the RR2B. I'm going to support this. I think that the tenant disruption is definitely worthy of consideration. I do feel comfortable that there has been enough done at this point, and I hope that through the phasing, the tenant's disruption will be managed. You know, I don't think it can be understated. We know that our city... is lacking rental housing. We know that increasing rental housing allows tenants to have more options. At this time in 2022, there wasn't a lot of rental housing. There is a lot more now, but it's whether or not it's affordable. And so I can appreciate that the tenants themselves here likely had to make their own personal decision about whether or not to take less expensive rent. more deeper affordability with a shorter term window in terms of how long they would be able to stay there and those conversations and considerations I think are individual choices and circumstances so that I think is a considerable difference we talked about a project yesterday that had massive tenant disruption with no heads up and it's a very different situation so I feel comfortable supporting this, but I'll just say for the record that I think that we need to be figuring out how to make sure that there is enough lift to deliver child care. We just are going to suffer greatly in our city if we continue to increase housing without an accommodation for some sort of child care and where the opportunity comes. is in partnering with the province to deliver $10 a day childcare. And the more spaces we have available for publicly supported childcare as opposed to privately owned and operated, then we have a plan in place. And again, I think that there's a strong economic imperative to provide affordable childcare and the long-term vision for our city. So I'll continue to raise that should I continue to get the chance. So I am happy to support this project today and I appreciate the work that's gone into making it happen and recognizing that tenants need to be supported as human beings, families that are dealing with disruption. And I ask and trust that that will be the approach that's taken. So I'm happy to support this today. Thanks.

Thank you, Councillor Kirby-Young.

Thanks, Mayor. I do think that we don't often get a proposal that comes forward that asks for reduced density, but I will say what I do like about this proposal, it's refreshing, I think, for people to see a mix of tenures on the site and a mix of building forms. And I think that makes for an interesting city, and I think it's what people are looking for in addition to sort of tower fatigue, if I can call it that, to be able to see... some diverse choices and some ground-oriented housing, and it's great to have sort of rental and ownership options alongside. I actually do really support the fact that the public amenity that was retained was the park. in terms of the green space because, and while it may be a bit smaller, I think it's really important that people have room to breathe in an increasingly densifying city. And we hear that a lot. And so, yes, we need larger sort of parks that do a lot of hard work. And, you know, you have your larger ones where people can go and... Play ball and do other things but sometimes I just want a quiet space to kind of take a break could take a minute and having those sort of smaller footprint or pocket parks Are very much valued. There's another one not too far from here that the city had advanced as well In conjunction with a bike lane and it used to be a single-family home and these things are loved and used in the respective neighborhoods So for me, I think that's an important one. That's the one amenity that the city can on our own. I think we have refocused our childcare policy in terms of looking at what the city can enable realistically within the economic constraints. And we've done a lot, this council, in terms of advancing that and moving regulations forward. But we also recognize that we need to focus on sort of a lot of the livability issues and the key amenities and neighborhoods. So I think for me that this landed on the right amenity. I'm really happy to see that piece. And I do appreciate the clarity that the tenants that have moved in have done so with eyes wide open in terms of sort of choosing that particular living situation at that point in time. So, yeah, I'm happy to support it, and I appreciate staff walking through it. Thanks.

Thank you. Councillor Claassen.

Yeah, thanks very much. Just a few brief comments here. So, you know, we realize that this project has come back and there has had some, I think, some practical decisions needed to be made. And as Councillor Corbett-Young says, the mix of building forms, I think, will really lend itself very well to this area. I actually really love the fact that the park will be along Laurel Street and 19th. The first home my wife and I purchased was about two blocks away from here. I remember when our daughter was first born, she was a little cranky. We had to do late night walks with the baby stroller around Douglas Park and it would be down Laurel Street. And it was a nice leisurely stroll down there. And always, I think that this will be a really great fit for this area. You know, we're talking about building stock there that is about three quarters of a century old. So it was time for some renewal there. There has been attention to tenant displacement, which I think is obviously non-negotiable for this council. And I also wanted to just note that this is quite close to the expanding Vancouver General Hospital campus. And we know that Housing for all workers at that facility will be really important, including a lot of the service staff that I think would probably find a great place to live and potentially raise a family there. So anyway, just look forward to seeing this move forward, and I think it's a great fit for this neighborhood. Thanks very much. Thank you, Councillor Orr.

Yeah, thanks. I was just wondering if staff had an answer on the question around if, yeah, for median income, if they can afford the market rental units in this building.

Thanks so much. Councillor Maloney?

Yeah, it is persuasive to me that... we face a choice of having a variety of low-rise family housing or no housing at all here, realistically. And it is extremely disappointing to lose the childcare. And the reality appears to be that no matter how we vote on this, there is no possibility of childcare and the city needs to do everything it can to make sure that we... facilitating as much childcare as possible because there's a desperate need. Unfortunately, this is so disappointing because the principal way we get new childcare spaces for families in Vancouver is through new developments. So this is a real blow, but I'm going to support it because I do want to see family housing built on this site rather than no development at all. And that's a choice that we face here.

Thank you very much. Seeing no one else in the queue, I'm going to call the vote. If we can please go to the voting panel.

Okay, we will now move on to item 26, or 26. Closure and exchange of portions of road adjacent to 961 West 19th Avenue. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to declare it. Does anyone have a conflict of interest to disclose? This item does not have a team member presentation.

Recommendation moved. Seconder? Seconded by Councillor Kirby-Young. Thanks very much. All right.

That's our pride There you go, okay Very good. Okay, so that passes with Council or in opposition. All right My notes here. Are we going back to 18? Okay. We are going back to CD report 18 cd1 rezoning 8 4 2 7 to 8 4 8 3 can be Street this was item was held by councillor or Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to declare it. Does anyone have a conflict of interest to disclose? This item has a presentation. We have team members here to present the item, unless, of course, council chooses not to see the presentation.

Okay. Second. All those in favor? Any opposed? Okay. So we will waive the presentation, and we have team members here. I'm sorry.

Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Okay.

Go right ahead.

Okay, thanks very much. Council members, you have up to five minutes to ask any questions of team members and the applicant. Are there any questions? Councillor Orr.

Thank you. Yeah, similar to the previous sort of sites that we talked about on Canby, this is a growing area and, you know, it's a big development. I just want a little bit of clarity around... Reducing the amount of units, you know, that it doesn't sort of fit the 20%. It's actually only 17%. Just walk me through sort of some of those difficulties to delivering the full 20% in terms of social housing delivery, I guess. And yeah, I really just want some more sort of insight into the 17% versus 20%.

Yeah, either or.

Okay, staff, if you have anything to... This is kind of the same.

Thanks very much. Okay. Seeing no. Yeah. Move by and seconded by Councillor Bligh. Okay. Sorry. Councillor.

Okay. Here we go. Take us to the voting panel, please, clerk. Okay, so that passes unanimously. All right. CD1, we're going to report 19 now. CD1 rezoning 2345 to 2349 Main Street. Before we begin this agenda item, if anyone believes they have a conflict of interest, now is the time to declare it. Does anyone have a conflict of interest to disclose? This item has a presentation. We have team members to present this item. So unless council does not want to see the presentation. We've got a mover. Do I have a seconder? Second. Okay. All those in favor? Any opposed? Okay. I guess that carries. All right. So we would ask the applicant if they are here and they would like to make any comments about their application.

The applicant, you're welcome to come and speak to council if you have any comments to make.

Great. Thank you very much. Councillor Claston.

Fair point of procedure. We're coming up on to the 12 o'clock break. I was going to move that we complete this item and then come back and finish the rest of council business after in camera.

Is there a seconder, first of all? Councillor Zhou, thank you. Council, any discussion? Okay, so let me do this. Can we take a picture of where we are and then start the queue? So, Councillor Kirby Young.

I have a question. Can you just advise, Mayor, what that would mean in terms of the start time for in-camera, whether Council will get a break or not at lunch? I know apparently we have to reconvene from yesterday, so I'm just looking for what the trajectory looks like.

Councillor Klassen.

No, that's actually not a question for Councillor Klassen. That would be a question for you, Chair.

Okay. Sorry, I just thought you were going to recommend it. So if we were going to finish the business today, I would assume that it would just go over, sorry, this item, it would just go over past noon. And if we run the, you know, the opportunity of starting in camera at one o'clock. So even if we go a little bit over during, you know.

So I guess my question is, this item takes half an hour, 45 minutes. Will there be a lunch break before in camera starts or no? Will we commence in camera?

Yes, I would. We can have half an hour for lunch. Is that right? Or we can take the full hours at council's discretion.

I'm looking for some indication if there's some break, even half an hour.

We can adjust in Cameron, so yes, half an hour break.

Okay. Any other discussion? Councillor Meiszner.

Thanks. I'd support half an hour for lunch, but obviously if people have concerns about that, I want to hear from them. But when would we come back from in-camera? Do we have a specific time that we would come back to the chamber? That's what I'd like to know.

I would assume that we could cover off the business in camera in approximately one hour. So wherever this goes to take a half hour for lunch, go in camera and then provide one hour for in camera and then show it back here after that one hour.

So we could come back conceivably here at 2 p.m.? Okay, that would be great. Yes, we finish this item by 12.30. Okay, I'm just trying to avoid a situation where in-camera finishes relatively quickly and then we're kind of waiting for a couple hours to return to council business.

The other alternative is putting it out there. We could finish the business here, all of it, and then go take a lunch break, then go in-camera.

It's counselor that we um have counselor dominant on Maloney Talk first and then we'll um

Thanks, Mayor. I was just wanting to clarify the motion on the floor from Council Clawson was to extend past noon to complete this item. Is that the motion? Okay. Okay. And then I heard the discussion around sort of navigating lunch in camera.

I'm not clear how much longer, how much, I don't know how much more business we have if we could extend through lunch to complete. the agenda as you're suggesting, Mayor. I would support that, but I don't know how many people have questions to this item and comments on...

It's looking a little long, guys. We've got four or five speakers on this one. We've got another item.

Okay, then I will support extending past 12 noon to complete this item.

Let's finish this item. And then we'll make the call on how long we get breaks after we finish this item. So...

Yeah, so just to complete that thought, I would support extending past 12 noon to complete this item and to have a shortened lunch break of 30 minutes and move into in-camera following that.

And I was just informed as well, in-camera may take more than an hour.

Okay, Councillor Maloney.

I am very happy to keep going to finish this item and have a shortened lunch break and then go into in-camera. But I would like a set time, please, to come back. I think it's too ambitious to assume that in-camera is going to be short and I would like to set three o'clock as the return time.

Thank you. So, Councillor Klassen, so can you just reaffirm your motion on... We will complete this item, take a 30-minute...

So the motion is to complete this item and then go to lunch, but I think we have an agreed-upon 30-minute lunch break, and then we'll have in-camera, and then we'll finish, complete the item of council business after in-camera, and it sounds like we'll probably need until about 3 o'clock. But let's finish this item, see what the times are, and then kind of do a time stamp on it. Okay. Thanks a lot. Okay, so that...

So awesome. You're good with that. Yeah. Okay. So any other conversation before we put that motion to a vote?

No, not yet. Okay. So now we're going to vote on it. All in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. Nay. Two nays. So councillors Maloney and Kirby Young. opposed so that passes so just to confirm what we just heard um we will finish this item we will break for lunch we will start in camera at one o'clock we will reconvene here at two o'clock and if we need to um well we have up to 2 30 to start the council meeting Great. Thank you very much. Okay. So with that, if we can please get to, oh, Councillor Meiszner, we are in questions now. So council members, you have up to five minutes to ask questions of team members and the applicant. Councillor Meiszner, you're up.

Yeah, thank you. Question for staff. I noted in the report a concern around tower separation to the north, south, and west, but the applicant said in their comments that they would be able to have 80 feet of tower separation. So I'm just looking for some context on that.

Sure thing. Susanne, we're always on the plan, but I think development planning will be better to answer this.

Okay. was approved and constructed, would it be possible still to build a tower to the north?

And does the plan contemplate towers in those locations? Like, are we losing additional housing, essentially, by approving something that doesn't meet minimum tower separation? I don't know if that's clear enough, but I see Josh is coming up.

Okay, thanks for that. Another question, and it's quite specific, but it was mentioned as well. I think it was the Bonas rental tower that we recently approved at UConn and Broadway. just down the street here, quite a narrow tower. I think the speaker from the applicant, West Bank, had indicated that this was similar. Can you speak to that? Sorry, I know I'm putting you on the spot. Yeah, development planning can help us with that. I just want to know, is this like a similar situation or is there something different about that project?

Yeah, okay. Thanks for explaining that, why there was a different recommendation proposed for council there. And then the loading, I see that's also an issue. Is that currently an issue with the existing operations there? I'm not super – I know where it is, but I don't know if that's really an issue. Neil from engineering will help answer that. Okay, thank you.

Thanks. Kind of following up on that, too, just in terms of not just loading, but student pickup and drop-off, if you could... If council so chooses to ignore staff's recommendations and approve this in principle, I guess, what does that look like?

Okay, thanks. Thanks for that clarity. And then maybe just a follow-up to staff. Is there likely to be less traffic in the area just because there's going to be SkyTrain now access? Is that a possibility? I don't know.

Okay, and then shifting to just the student housing, this is kind of a similar situation to, I believe, like the VGH. where we didn't have workforce housing. Now we're into no policy really around student housing. And it looks like, you know, it says Appendix B will require student housing to be operated either through ownership or long-term lease by one or more of BC's public library post-secondary institutions. What would that look like? Because it says also that there's no clear pathway to such a partnership. So what is that looking like?

For sure. And the risk then would be that we, you know, if council chooses to approve that we have these dormitory style housing that just could become like on the market.

Okay. It looks like the applicant wants to speak to this.

We'll have to pause there. That's your time, Councillor. Councillor Kerr, be young.

Yeah, I'm going to follow up on that thread with the applicant. You've been trying to do this, you said, for a number of years. So I guess I'm wondering why haven't the conversations advanced or which do you intend to partner with an organization, a post-secondary? Do you intend to operate it yourself? What is the intention?

Just because we have limited time, I want to make sure that my question is clear. Do you intend to operate the housing piece yourself, like Go Ballet, or do you intend to partner with another organization, a non-profit or an educational institution? What is the intent?

Okay, so if I can follow up on that, if you would run it yourselves, Chan, who would you be renting those units to? Which students or who are you planning to have living there?

Okay, what if somebody came and was not a student and wanted to rent one of these units?

Okay. Can I direct a question to staff? Can you speak to the covenant piece for me, please, and indicate does that protect, for example, from the creation of a building that's simply microsuites that are smaller than the required minimums in the city and that could potentially be rented to other folks that are not students, or how much that covenant actually provides protection around that it's generally for students? Thank you.

So it would have to be 320. And so these suites could be rented as microsuites, and once somebody's no longer a student, they would have to move out?

So we, the city, would have to take on that?

Okay. And then with the 320 square feet that you say is a minimum that you would require if this were to proceed against the staff recommendation, and the report size livability concerns, for example, with the size and the narrowness of this lot, does this provide for something like windows or ventilation in these rooms, or are you going to have rooms that don't have any windows or air?

The city would want the units to have air and windows.

My next question is it notes that there's a separate public hearing will be required for the heritage component. Why does that need to be done separately? Why would that not be bundled together in one rezoning application, for example?

Okay. And so this, and if the hearing on the heritage component doesn't pass in it, then these entitlements are not enacted. Is that correct?

Can I move for a second round? I need to get this answered.

Yeah, I got it. Opposed? Carry on.

I can come back on unless Councillor Bligh is coming in. May I?

Councillor Bligh is not there.

Sorry, one second. Councillor Bligh is on the queue. She's not here. So Councillor Meyers, I'm going to advance you and then we'll kick.

I would appreciate hearing from the applicant around the window question.

Thanks for clarifying that. My other question for the applicant as well, it wasn't super clear to me. I understand 100% student housing, but how much of that student housing is allocated for Go Ballet? number of units percentage?

And remind me how many units this proposes, 300 something?

250? 315. 350? 315, one five. Okay, okay, so only 10 units. So with that said, why not pursue a six-story building on the site? Given only the need of the 10 units for go ballet students.

Okay, thank you. So I fully understand the need for student housing. I worked at UBC for eight years. It's a huge issue across the city. I'm just curious, though, in terms of student housing, is the revenue from that intended to, I guess, fund the expense of the restoration of the former RBC building? Is that kind of the model that you're looking at?

Okay. Thank you for that. And then just one more question around the building form, etc. Land assembly, was there an attempt or outreach made to the adjacent property owners to, you know, have a broader land assembly in order to mitigate some of the tower separation issues?

Okay. Even though they know that if this is to be approved today, it could impact the development viability of their parcel.

Okay. Thanks for the context. Appreciate it. Councillor Kerbiel.

Yeah, thank you, Chair. I just want to follow up on that question around, I think Templer was answering around the heritage piece and that requiring, you said this part came forward, if I'm recapping, because it was compliant with the ODP and could not be done with heritage that had to be done separately.

Okay. And if the heritage, if a conceptual future... heritage public hearing did not pass, then these entitlements would not stand. Is that correct?

So can I ask the... Can I ask the question a different way then? If Council were to not approve the staff recommendation, refer it back, and allow this to move forward, what is the level of confidence over the heritage protection? Because it's sounding to me like it's not required. It's a future effort. It's an intention, but it doesn't sound like it's fully required.

The Heritage Commission liked this project very much from a heritage perspective, so we don't have any doubts that it would be approved by Council in the way it's proposed. Well, not sure that answers your question. With all due respect, we can't suppose of Council's future decision. Of course. And it's helpful to know that the Heritage Commission likes it, but I guess my question is really around certainty for heritage protection.

Okay. I appreciate that. That's helpful. And then I guess my other question then, just if I'm understanding correctly, is that from a staff perspective, this would have been cleaner if the time... there's been a some way to get towards a compliant application because it could have been more cleanly bundled together and answered some of these questions that's correct okay I'll leave it there thank you very much I appreciate that okay counselors why it's not there counselor or yeah thanks I guess I have a question on the pricing of the student housing is would be for the applicant would this be set by

The university that you potentially would be working with or would this be set by Go Ballet or who would set this pricing? What is...

It could be both.

Okay, thanks. And can I get staff to answer the same question? I know that's probably a question for the applicant and why this is being referred. But just what options we have in terms of the city sort of stepping in there and requiring... I know you said there would be monitoring of the units, but... Housing policy and regulation can answer things.

The question is who sets the price? I mean, obviously, and the applicant answered. Yes. What other policies are there for universities?

Yeah, okay. That makes sense. And then I guess just maybe another question around maybe legal. I don't know, like, you know, weighing in on, I remember like early on in my term, there was a building, I think it was on West 7th, where... There was a question around tower separation and future land assemblies limiting those property developers. I think there was also a question in the West End around like the sort of first come first serve kind of principle.

Can you give us some further clarity on sort of handcuffing those landowners in the future? And does this set the city up for any kind of liability?

As far as liability, I mean, you said impacting their properties. Would this set the city up?

Mr. Frye.

Yeah. Generally, on the subject of student housing, am I correct in that we don't actually define that anywhere in the city of Vancouver right now?

And so otherwise the size that's contemplated here is compatible with like an SRO micro unit, that kind of thing?

So really, to even do this requires some degree of significant policy work to come up with. How are we defining student housing? How are we ensuring that it is... Indeed, for students, not SRO micro-units or what have you, in those kind of conditions.

And do SROs, like, as comparably, do they still have the same tenancy rights, like RTA kind of considerations? How would tenancy work in the concept of student housing? Or is this, again, something that... Yeah, it's a good question. I'm not sure. I see the applicant is stepping up to the mic. But here we have Annie Mobilis.

Thanks, Annie Mobilis, Housing Policy and Regulation. Maybe an additional reason from a housing perspective to refer back to staff is without a student housing policy, it's hard to be able to answer that question, quite frankly. The student housing isn't covered by the RTA, the Residential Tenancy Act, because students, you know, arrive in September, typically leave in June. And so there's a different construct there around the management kind of operation of student housing. And we just don't have a view in on how we would regulate that at the city. I hope that answers your question.

And I see the applicant wanting to...

Sorry, expand on that for me. I missed that. The three months.

Right. But that doesn't necessarily apply. Same tenancy. Right, as a regular renter?

And I see... Yeah, that's correct.

Okay, thank you. Parking, the parking loading drop-off consideration, my... My wife works nearby, and my friend Mike Wiebe had a restaurant there. So I know that loading and drop-off is already a significant consideration around the go-ballet functions. And I note this application talks about going underground. Is there no contemplation of having a new access point for underground parking or anything like that? I'm assuming this is a pretty significant underground excavation.

Going to advance Councillor Kirby-Young. Thank you. Councillor Kerr-Beyond.

Yeah, thank you. I'll follow up on that because that was actually sort of my question. I appreciate students necessarily on transit in terms of folks that are living there, but I know that you're looking to increase capacity at the school with the restoration and capacity. So I have seen tons of parents dropping off kids, and I know it's compounded right now, the Broadway subway construction, but my heart is in my mouth every time I see it because you see these beautiful, young, aspiring kids ballet students and they are darting in and out across those that street so I guess my question for maybe it's for staff is what or what happens because you're still going to and most of the applicant you're still going to have more students coming in and out there and these are young folks right yes thank you so much for your concern and for raising this point um

Before I run out of time, will you have more classes and more people after the renovation than you do today? I hope to. For staff, what happens to loading or access on the street? How are people, students coming in and out?

I'm at time, sorry.

Mr. Dominato.

Yeah, thanks, Chair. I have a couple questions for staff and for the applicant. One, because I'm hearing in the questions being raised around student housing and the lack of a framework. Could staff comment? There was a motion and direction given to develop a framework around student housing. It was given several years ago with a report back for 2024. And so I'm curious... how that fits in the context of an application like this where we were, and maybe we're still working on it, but given that direction was given quite some time ago, how we see that fitting with this application.

That's helpful. And I know, as I was commenting on yesterday, our sort of global and local environment has changed quite a bit. I'm curious, appreciating that there's a recommendation here to have this go back to staff, but I'm curious what that would mean in terms of timelines. And I noted in the context of that this project has been on the books for some time. And so what does that look like in terms of timing?

So can I ask you this?

With a referral back, and we've seen a few of these, not many, that's led by staff, can there be provision of, you know, if a referral back is really necessary to resolve those issues, with a timeline to come back to council included so that, for example, that it come back in by no later than the end of Q4 of 2026 or something like that? Because what I worry about is the the leg and not prioritizing something like this because I've heard all the amount of work that's gone into it behind the scenes to get to this place. So I'm curious about that provision.

OKAY.

RIGHT. OKAY. AND CHAIR, JUST NOTING THERE WAS A SECOND ROUND MOVE, SO I'M GOING TO USE MY TIME. for those questions. So it was already moved, so I'll continue. So, okay, so I'll take that and set that aside. I may work on something around that. But I also, before I go there, it's probably a question to staff and also to the applicant. Setting aside that the immigration trend is changing, the restrictions there around international students, I'm curious if we have trend data, and maybe, Chan, you have this, around the... student population and student housing needs, just with our domestic students that are here and what you have. I have anecdotal information, but I'm curious if you have more concrete information about domestic students and housing.

Okay, I have another question at the time I have, and that is hearing your concerns about sort of expediency and trying to advance this. In a scenario where this is delayed and you're not, is there a high likelihood that you would move out of Vancouver? And I ask in the context of another dance school that is thriving, but they did move. They started in Vancouver. They grew. They expanded. They're well-recognized, highly sought after. They have great dancers. And they moved out of the city because they couldn't find space. And even in their space now, it's probably temporary because it's on a development site in another city. And so I'm curious sort of what it means for you. And I know I only have two minutes left for a response. So just acknowledging that your comments on that.

Okay. Thank you for those responses. I appreciate it. Thank you, Chair.

Okay. Thanks very much, Councillor. Okay. So I'm going to go to the main queue here.

Councillor, is there any further discussion?

Councillor Meiszner?

Yeah, thank you. I want to thank the applicant and also staff for answering all of our questions around this application. I'm very supportive of Go Ballet and the work that you do and you're a, you know, iconic cultural institution in our city bringing dance and art for, for decades. And I want, I want to recognize that and share my appreciation for that. I also think that the proposal has merit in terms of bringing student housing to a transit oriented location. Obviously, the heritage restoration of the former bank building, which I'm very interested in. But I did move the staff recommendation because I do feel that the proposal does need more work. And I know that will be disappointing to the applicant. I do have concerns around the frontage issue and the limiting of development of adjacent sites. as well as the concerns raised around the loading and drop-off. And I'm hopeful that some of those issues can be worked through with further refinement with staff. This is a very important part of our city, as you know. It is soon to be the station area for the Mount Pleasant...

Sorry, Councillor Meister. Yes. I apologize. We lost quorum. I'm going to pause your timer. We've lost quorum. That's unfortunate. We're going to recess until we get to... Okay, I can continue my comments. We're going to recess for lunch, and we'll have to come back and do final decision on this one. Thanks very much. Okay, we'll come back.

Sorry, I just need to know how long are we talking about half hour lunch. So should we? I'm just trying to think when we should take in camera. One o'clock. It's less than a half hour.

I'm just going to lock the meeting shortly. So whoever saw the staff member, please leave the team's invite and I'll be joined at 2 p.m.

Okay, great. Okay, so we're going to continue off, or where we left off last, Councillor Meissner.

Thank you so much. We'll give you some extra time. No, it's okay. I have a point of information, I guess, privilege. I just want to know from the clerks if I can withdraw my moving of the recommendation. Is that possible?

Yes, you can.

Okay.

Thank you.

Just to provide more context for Council, I just realized that moving that may have been quite premature. As I was the first on the queue and I'd rather have a discussion before moving any recommendations.

Okay. And it's not debatable. So do we have to go to a recorded vote or do we just show of hands?

Point of privilege, because I wasn't here.

No, I understand, but I wasn't sure what he had moved in the first place.

Okay. All right. So we'll try this show of hands. All in favor say yay. All those opposed say nay.

Great. And so that fails with Councillor Orr and Councillor Maloney in opposition. It had to be unanimous. Okay. So I'm going to go back to Councillor Meiszner. You said you're going to cede your... Okay, great. Councillor Dominato.

Point of information through you. Am I able to ask a question of the applicant?

I have limited time. My point of information through you, Chair, to the staff is If a time-bound referral, as I was asking questions about this, I'm curious if the applicant would be amenable to that and the project would be still supportable if this was referred back with a timestamp of this coming back in November of 2026 or December at the latest, and whether the staff and the applicant, and I know the applicant can't answer my question, could work together to address the outstanding issues. Because I think it has a lot of merit, the project, and so I want to understand the ramifications of that.

Okay. I'm going to pause there. I don't want to run out of time. Thank you, Mayor.

Councillor Klassen.

Yeah, similar line of questions for me. I'm quite curious to know, it seems to me that there are some gaps here, but again, this is an arts-related facility. Is it possible to see an approval with conditions, like a conditional approval, essentially, that would allow us to make sure that the adequate time for drafting a bylaws, what have you, that would obviously there'd be a gap that would come back to us to approve those bylaws. But is there a way for us to get an approval and potentially look at some of the use of the building? One of the ideas that sort of came to mind during our earlier deliberations is that we have a lot of resident artists for groups that work for different arts or cultural organizations. that often struggle to house those artists because of the cost of housing in our city. That would be a potential interesting mix here. But again, Templar, I'm kind of relying upon your expertise in this area.

So, Mayor, obviously we have Council Dominata on the queue here, but if we were able to recess to allow staff to at least... Yeah, you know, just in light of everything that's going on...

Why don't we take a 10-minute recess?

Thanks, Mayor. Thanks very much. Appreciate the time. I'm going to now allow you to advance to Councillor Domonato, please.

Thank you. Councillor Domonato.

Yes, Mayor. I think I got most of my questions answered. One last one was to staff as a point of information. No, you don't want to leave it. Forget it. Thanks.

Okay. Councillor Kirby Young.

Yeah, thanks, Mayor. So I'm just going to see no one else in the queue, correct? Sorry, I've got different screens here. That's correct. Okay, so I would like to strike the recommendation that's on the floor, which is the staff recommendation to refer it in its entirety, and then I would like to replace it with the alternative recommendation that has been emailed to all council. Yes, please.

Sorry, Councillor, I'm just going to add you to the amendment. Please go ahead.

Yeah, thanks, Mayor. And so my proposal is to replace... the staff recommendation, strike their staff recommendation to replace it with this alternative recommendation, which in essence allows this project to proceed. My rationalization is this, recognizing that we have a gap in student policy and there are still a number of issues and considerations to be worked out, which is in very simple and practical terms, I do not believe that the Go Ballet, which is a beloved cultural institution that provides a lot of value in our city, has the financial wherewithal to redevelop its facility on its own. And this proposal provides a pathway to do that, to not only renovate, but to modernize, improve, and expand its space and capacity. and as well as the addition of the 10 rooms, while not a lot, to be sure out of the total number of rooms, it does allow it to have a modernized home and to continue doing what it wants to do in sort of honestly where its roots are right here in the city of Vancouver. And then secondly, it recognizes that this is a pathway towards heritage retention, because I will note that the previous applicant has done projects or sorry, the applicant, I should say. Sorry, it's been a long few days, has done projects downtown that involved heritage retention and did deliver on those and did. really stellar job in terms of respecting the heritage one was a church downtown on Nelson Street I believe another so that provides me with some confidence that the heritage commitment is there and will be fulfilled and we are losing a lot of our heritage as our city grows as it needs to grow So I look at sort of the two key public benefits of retaining the go ballet in the city, improving their space and their ability to continue to serve people in a better way, and retaining the heritage. We will learn. This will be, I think, almost a bit like a real-life pilot around getting to some clarity around some issues. or questions perhaps some may be issues some may be questions around how we we treat student housing I will acknowledge that councillor Dominato has been a long champion of student housing and brought a motion forward previously to look at advancing this we still don't have a framework on that so this does provide us with an opportunity to work towards defining something and that would include things like ensuring how the covenant is treated, who has access to the accommodation, how that is managed and monitored as sort of a best practice, and to work through a number of those specific issues. And I'll also note, too, that while it is a particularly narrow site at 62 feet of frontage, our city has to this date been a very young city. that has had the benefit of not being constrained by space as much, despite the fact we're between the ocean and the mountains, because we didn't have the population. And so we have always been able to adhere to sort of larger frontages and larger lots. A lot of interesting cities do have a lot of infill buildings like this, and I think it's more appropriate, particularly when there's a heritage or another rationalization for it, as opposed to sort of wholeheartedly endorsing narrow frontages. So I think that's an important consideration to think about as well. I'll also note too that a lot of the questions, and I think it was a good discussion that were raised by council with things like the minimum room size. My understanding from that conversation is that that would still be required. And so that is not sort of a discussion point. These are pieces that were listed as conditions within the report as articulated should council consider the alternative recommendation, which is what I'm proposing now. So I hope that provides some context around it. And then I'll let councillors comment. Thanks.

Thank you very much.

Councillor Domenato.

Yes. Can I speak to the motion then? Yeah. Go ahead then. We don't have to change queues. I'm happy to support this and I was asking a lot of questions earlier around time frame because I was actually surprised that this was coming forward as a referral back to staff and appreciating the system we work within and as was articulated sort of the approaches to dealing with these items even though we're not in a public hearing per se. I think the opportunity here lies in an intentional discussion between staff and the applicant around addressing the persistent concerns that are outlined in the presentation, that are outlined in the report. I think many of these things can be accommodated. And specifically to the actual need, we know, we heard very clearly from Chan, the needs of the dance studio and working within the constraints of an existing heritage building that is clearly, when you've got buckets to grab water that's dropping from the ceiling and so on, it's not... ideal for a dancing studio. The other, and so, and then I think speaking to the actual student housing component, obviously the housing for the dancers, but also for other students, the reason I was asking about the domestic need is that while we have curtailed immigration in many ways in this country, there is still a domestic need for student housing. And when you look at where this building, the site is situated, it's just a block from the Broadway line that will be open soon. And so it creates a great opportunity for students going to UBC, for example, but also accessible to others going to other post-secondary institutions in the lower mainland. And we are a hub for post-secondary. And so I think there's an opportunity there. And again, I think there can be greater conversation about those units, about partnerships. I know some of my colleagues will speak to that in terms of opportunities. And so I think this project has a lot of merit. And my hope is that these issues can be addressed as part of the process. And I think everyone's there at earnest at the table. So I'm happy to support it. I think it's an important part of the city and the contributions not only from the dance studio, but the potential for the student housing as well.

Thank you. Yeah, thanks. I don't need to add too much more to the comments just given by Councillors Kirby Young and Domonato, except that I do think that we sometimes find ourselves wanting for trying to send signals to our artists and our arts and culture sector that we really do value them. And this is, I think, one of those things that we can do. Go Ballet has been an absolute staple and important institution in the city. But as we've seen through some of the work we've done with the Dance Center Society, for example, it takes a lot of creativity. It requires a lot of support from community to try and make sure that these institutions, especially when they have a purpose-built building for their artists to train and demonstrate their art, we really do need to try and find inventive ways of solving those issues. And certainly, Compster Dominata, we supported earlier some direction on student housing. We know that the Broadway line will be an absolute transformative amenity that will allow this particular place connect to other parts of the city and would allow for people to live here more affordably as a result. So again, just would like to support the recommendation as... as tabled now and the alternative recommendation. And I would like to hopefully see through this process that we come up with an incredibly important cultural amenity in our city. Thanks.

Well, I hate to come out as the contrarian here, but I... I can't reconcile some of the staff recommendations. This does come from our professional planning staff and their concerns around the unit size and their concerns around shadowing and parking and loading. And I mean, I think there's a lot of valid concerns. And I think that. That, you know, I think. The pathway forward that staff have suggested, and I think is probably appropriate, is referring this back to staff to do that additional work and come up with something that is a little bit more compliant. I am a little concerned with the micro suite kind of configuration and the fact that we don't actually have a defined... student housing, which I believe that, you know, sounds great, but I think that it needs to be codified and it needs to have appropriate tenant protections if that's going to be applicable. And there's a bunch of stuff that I think that needs to happen on this. And I would be supportive of an amendment to the referral to expedite the staff work on this, but I struggle with... What I believe this is just basically passing it as presented, unless the mover wants to correct me on that. It seems that this is passing what's been presented in the application, and I'm struggling with that.

Thank you, Councillor Bligh.

Yeah, and I had to step away for the last part of the meeting before we broke for lunch, and so I just wonder if the point of information through you, Chair, if I can better understand the implications of approving this as an alternate sort of path forward and what that means in terms of taking these recommendations back and continuing to work with The applicant, and if you can add just the context, I mean, it's pretty significant, 100 square feet essentially from our minimum unit size to what's being proposed. Seems like a lot when you're only talking about 397 or 98 is our minimum and 269 or whatever it is in this one. So those two pieces.

Okay, and is it fair to say had there been more time, we may have seen something that would have gotten there eventually that would have been supportable by staff?

Okay, I'll come off for now. Thank you.

Councillor Meiszner. Yeah, thanks, Chair. Just following up on Councillor Bligh's question, just for clarity for myself, for you, to staff, just because of the unique situation with this alternate recommendation being moved or this recommendation being moved proposed by my colleague, the conditions in the design development appendix A and B still apply, correct? Like there's no way to override those through this process?

Yeah, okay.

Okay, thanks. I'll just say that I do feel a bit more comfort with moving this forward, knowing that those conditions are in these appendices because they do speak to many of the concerns that I've had around the building form. and the size of the units, et cetera. So I will be supporting the motion on the floor. Thanks. Thank you. Councillor Fry?

Yeah, Chair, if I may, through you back to staff, just to get a little bit more clarity on this Appendix B, because I'm getting a little bit confused. So the suggestion is that Appendix B will modify the proposed unit sizes to be more compliant with our standard unit size. Does that mean less units on the whole? Does this... make the pro forma still work?

And so just to get clarity, I mean, has that been discussed? Does that make this project still viable and workable if they've got... Less, but bigger units.

And looking at the applicants, the Appendix B is...

Thank you.

Yeah, I think that answered my question about coming back to council. But through you, Chair, to staff, maybe also, again, there was mention of around the heritage component also triggering a public hearing. Is that also on the table or is that taken care of here?

Okay.

Okay, perfect. Thank you. Seeing no one else in the queue, I'm going to call the vote on Councillor Kirby Young's amendment.

So we'll go back to the main queue. Councillor Kirby Young.

Good. Thank you, Chair.

Seeing no one else in the queue, why don't we bring the main motion as amended to a vote.

And that passes unanimously. And that completes item number 19.

Okay, moving along. Item number 21. Thank you. CD-1 rezoning 5027 through 5053, Boundary Road. Before we begin this agenda item, are there any conflicts of interest to disclose? No. This item does have a presentation. Councillor Zhou, move to waive. Seconded by Councillor Klassen. Any discussion? All those in favour of waiving the presentation, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. One, two, three. So, clerk, is it simple majority? Okay. So, and did you get that for the record, councillors, or Bly and Fry opposed? Okay, so we will waive the presentation. Would the applicant like to make a presentation?

Thank you very much. Council, you have up to five minutes to ask questions of team members to the applicant. Are there any questions? Councillor Fry, please go ahead.

Yeah, so a question, I guess, for staff. This is being approved as a social housing project. I looked and I can't find anything really of note about the applicant as a social housing provider. How does this work?

Yeah, and I'm curious because, you know, obviously we have some rigor around social housing providers, and then we just had the earlier conversation around VRS, and so I'm curious how this knits together. And to hear from the applicant, too, sure.

So do we, where do we show the sort of the rigor in selecting or in determining nonprofit housing providers?

Okay, I mean, this is a significantly scaled project to deliver nonprofit housing for an organization that has never done nonprofit. In the event that they aren't able to fulfill their obligation under this, I'm assuming there's a covenant that ties it to be nonprofit housing, or does it tie it to that organization?

So in the event that Orpheus is unable to fulfill their obligation, it would... necessitate a new nonprofit to run the before occupancy?

Okay. Is the applicant Orpheus?

Councillor Dominato?

Yes, Mayor, thanks. I'm happy to let you finish, and then I have a question for you.

So if you want to finish your thoughts. Go ahead.

It's the applicant.

It's the applicant. Yeah, but these are, we're in questions now. We're not in a presentation by the applicant. It's different.

Just questions. So if you could reset my timer, Clarice. Just continue with your response, and then I have a question for you.

for this project. My other question is, have you done this before, undertaken a project like this, a social housing project?

And I'm sorry, we're out of time.

Thank you.

Thank you. Councillor Bligh?

Thanks very much. Happy to move a second round, just given the time has been used by some comments by the applicant.

Is there a seconder? Great. Any discussion? All in favor say yay. All opposed say nay. If that passes, we will have a second round.

Great. Just a couple of follow-up questions and appreciate, you know, in terms of, so first of all, the child care, do you have a proponent who's going to run the child care?

Can you share anything about the proponent?

So I see all that in the report. Don't we don't get a lot of time. So I just want to, yeah. So you met with VCH from a compliance perspective. Yes. Yeah. But do you have a private operator is what I was asking.

Are you able to share anything more about the private operator?

So is it Orpheus Housing Society?

Oh, it's up to you, whatever you like.

Okay, and given that it's social housing, and it sounds like this child care operator may have some affiliation to Orpheus in its social housing, as they say, how will the child care be structured in terms of affordability? As far as affordability goes... Is the goal to have the people who live in the social housing...

But from an affordability perspective, do you expect?

Well, it's up to the operator.

Or you mean subsidies through the province?

That's what I mean, but you're not providing subsidies internally with the child care?

Sorry, if I'm not being clear, it's my fault. I'm just trying to get a clear picture of what's happening with the child care. I understand how subsidies work provincially. I'm just asking whether or not this privately owned child care will be structuring its business model to... to provide the most cost-effective or affordable child care to the residents that live, given it's a social housing building. What I'm hearing is they would need to go through a separate subsidy program.

Okay. Your new society...

Exactly. So what was your jumping off point? Because it's pretty noble to have 21 stories of social housing in this current environment. We don't actually see it a lot without significant government funding or other partners, but it's not clear from this application how you're structuring this.

Do you receive government subsidy for your housing?

So you're doing it all.

Okay. I'll leave it there. It's my time. I'll come back on. Thanks.

Thank you. Counselor Frye.

Yeah, so it's very interesting and somewhat unusual. I actually don't see Orpheus in the report. I saw it in the rendering package. The applicants being the two numbered companies, is that you and your partner?

Right, so two separate numbered companies are submitting this application.

Okay. Maybe, and this is maybe over to staff, because again, this is... Not consistent. Yeah, thank you, Leo. Just as far as the FSR being proposed here is quite a leap from the outright. And it's not necessarily consistent with the transit-oriented areas. It's specifically because this is coming in as a social housing application.

And so this prescribed higher density is compliant with the TOA social housing construct?

It is, yes. Okay. And as we're defining the social housing, that means... owned by a nonprofit society with 20% below market? It would be 3% at Hills. 3% at Hills. Okay. Is this, I mean, I can't recall an application similar to this. Is this fairly, I mean, just the brand new housing provider. I'm just worried that this is setting a precedent for like a pretty significant upzoning where on a new product, basically.

I see Dan coming up.

Yeah, and you are agnostic when it comes to this. Now, do you...

Okay. All right. Thanks, Dan. Thank you, Councillor Bligh.

Thanks.

This is a question for staff. In terms of the child care, are we familiar with the child care operator on child care? I know they're not necessarily part of the applicant. The only reason I ask is there's a Shape Your City application from 2023, and I wonder if that went through all the way to DP, and we know that that's actually been built.

Okay. Maybe I can just ask, because it is under the Orpheus social housing, this swan child care you mentioned?

So... What happened with this site at 3604 Tanner Street? Did that get constructed, or is that a home-based child care?

Well, on your website, it says Swan Child Care, and it says location.

Okay. Are they a current child care provider?

Do they have locations that you're aware of?

Okay. It's just, yeah, there's... Just because you offered that up, there is no record of their other locations, so I'm not familiar. I'll come off and allow Councillor Kirby-Young, and then I'll come back on.

Great. Councillor Kirby-Young.

Yeah, thanks. I'll be brief. I haven't asked questions yet, but I don't intend to be long. A question, I guess, for staff, just to clarify, and I think Council's doing its due diligence around a new operator we're not familiar with, and I... really appreciate how difficult these projects are to deliver. So my question is not to cast any aspersion. It's just to provide counsel with assurance. There is a covenant on these units. So say, for example, the building were to be constructed, that covenant to covenant the full building as social housing would restrict any future change of tenure to market or something else. Is that correct?

For 60 years of the life of the building? Are those the parameters?

Okay. And the applicant is well aware of that?

Okay. Thank you.

Sorry, I had someone in my ear here. Okay. Yes. Thank you. Seconded by Councillor Klassen. Council, is there any discussion?

Okay.

Councillor Bligh.

Yeah, I appreciate the discussion and, you know, the opportunity to ask questions. It's actually quite unusual that we have an application, I think, like this without sort of just a clear roadmap of how this actually becomes successful in terms of financing the project at the end of the day. I have, based on what you shared, and I can only go by what we've heard from the applicant, I appreciate you being here. I'm left with more questions than answers, to be quite honest, in terms of how this works for you. And while I appreciate sort of how you've described the opportunity to provide below-market housing, affordable housing, Something just feels a little odd to me. Like, I'm not sure why electrification of charging, which we oftentimes are looking for and rarely come sort of fully planned out with a 74 space child care in this instance. The information I've gotten, I don't feel. leaves me with a tremendous amount of confidence that I've got the full picture here, I'm just saying, so not to cast any aspersions and appreciate we've got process in place, but these are quasi-judicial hearings for a reason, and while this is not a traditional public hearing, it still needs to sort of beat that threshold, and so I'm going to reserve my right to vote in accordance with what I have, and I don't feel like I have enough to really get a clear picture of how this goes from this stage all the way through to successful development. So I'm going to oppose today.

Yeah, thanks, Mayor. That actually triggered a question for me. At the point of parliamentary procedure for our clerks and legal staff is that in this new construct of rezoning items coming to council because they're prohibited from going to public hearing because of compliance with their ODP and provincial statutes, are these quasi-judicial proceedings anymore, or are they treated differently now?

No, that's helpful.

And no, I appreciate that. I'll leave it there for now. Thanks.

Thank you, Councillor Bligh.

Yeah, thanks very much. And there is, that's a very good point of clarification as we adjust to this new process, but gives me even more reason to pause. And I think I would have liked to have had more understanding and information outside of what's just sort of available in this process. So, again, we'll be voting against.

Mr. Fry? Yeah, I'm still struggling with some of the missing pieces on this, and I'm wondering if I could just ask one last question of staff through you, Chair. um have we come across scenarios where i mean we revise we do text amendments on approved applications all the time and come back and and change the parameters is it conceivable that if this doesn't play out as a social housing project that it comes back and it's like well look we've already built it can we just convert this into market and call it a day

Right, and so, okay, I mean, but at the same time it's delivering housing, so if it was to come back as market housing, if for whatever reason it couldn't perform as a social housing, they wanted to get rid of the 30% hills, you could conceivably, staff would be bringing, for a future council, bringing back a text amendment to say, you know what, we're going to just make this market...

Okay, thanks, Templar. I appreciate that. I still have so many unanswered sort of questions in my head. I'm struggling to give full support to this. I'll probably end up abstaining because I just don't have the complete confidence in this.

But yeah, thank you. Okay, Councillor Bligh.

Thanks. Just one further question through you, Chair, to staff is when did this application come in?

Just relatively quickly, that it's coming to public, or whatever this process is, to a council meeting, given the ODP. And your Orpheus was established in 2024?

Okay. Okay.

Okay, one last question. This SWAN child care, I mean, that really is not something that the staff are going to be involved in, right? Because that really is a privately owned child care. That's between the applicant and the proponent of the child or the provider. That's correct, Counselor.

Do we do any due diligence in looking into those things, given that, you know, child care is a pretty important public amenity and the conditions and regulations around providing child care are fairly, like, restricted? I hear there's, I think, 6,000 square feet of outdoor space?

Okay. Yeah, I mean, I appreciate the question so far. There are checks and balances, of course, for staff to be following up on this. I just have to say, I mean, even just having the light touch of information, 74 Space Child Care, the Swan Child Care, what I can find online looks like a pretty generic website with no locations other than an address that looks like in the basement of a house. So I really hope that staff can take that away and just... put a pin in that as a point of comment from this council, from me as a councillor now, that I have quite a lot of reservations about what that looks like and needs to be, the due diligence needs to be there, hopefully, as this moves through the process. So, again, I think at the end of the day, I just don't have enough information to vote in favor, but I may abstain. Thanks.

Thank you. Okay. Seeing no one else in the queue, I'm going to call the vote. If we can please go to the voting panel.

Okay.

Being that that was our last rezoning, or this is our last rezoning meeting, I do want to thank everyone on council, all our team members, the applicants, everyone that's put in so much work together. Look, there's been an extraordinary volume of... applications that have come through this chamber over the last four years. And these are pretty complex files that require a lot of collaboration with team members and the applicants. And it takes incredibly careful consideration, often late at night, as especially we've discovered that again over the past couple of weeks by all the decision makers being on council, but also everyone that shows up here because everyone has to be ready to ask questions. And I know we do have a whole group of diverse views looking at projects differently. You know, I actually think that makes us stronger. And, you know, sometimes we go through, you know, issues that, you know, don't get across the line per se. You know, and I know it's frustrating, but I think the process in general is pretty robust. And, you know, when people feel disappointed, I actually think that's incredibly healthy because that really shows how much people care. And with that together, we actually have collectively accomplished quite a bit. So in 2026 alone, council considered 127 rezonings. including over 30,000 homes, hotels, job spaces, and hundreds of millions of dollars worth of public benefits that will benefit Vancouverites. So everyone in this chamber, everyone who's put work into it, you should be really proud of yourselves. You've definitely made... Vancouver a better place and you've affected so many lives people future generations that will be able to live here kids that will be able to grow up in neighborhoods across the city people being able to find jobs close to home you know the list goes on and on and so On behalf of Council, I want to thank everyone here. And I'd actually like to invite Josh up to say a few words because you've been leading the charge on this.

have been withdrawn at the request of team members, and By-law 31 was approved yesterday, immediately following unfinished business. We now have 32 by-laws left on the agenda for enactment. We will consider by-laws 1 through 23, 25, 30, 32, through 38. Before we begin the agenda item, are there any conflicts of interest to disclose? No? Okay. Uh, council members who were absent for the public hearings related to the bylaws must confirm that they have reviewed the proceedings of the meetings, including the video clip to be eligible to vote. Bylaw two was from the public hearing on September the 15th, 2020. Councillors Classen, Maloney, Meisner, Montague or Joe and myself were not on council at the time of the public hearing. Councillor Klassen, have you reviewed the proceedings and will you be voting on the enactment?

I have and I will.

Councillor Montague?

I have and I will. Councillor Orr?

Councillor Zhou? I have not and I will not. Bylaws 3 and 4 were from the public hearing on February 5, 2026. Councillors Bly, Fry and Orr were absent for this item at the public hearing. Councillor Bligh, have you reviewed the proceedings and will you be voting on the enactment? Councillor Fry? Councillor Orr? By-law 6 was from the public hearing on May 30, 2024. Councillors Maloney, Orr, and myself were absent for this item at the public hearing. Councillor Maloney, have you reviewed the proceedings and will you be voting on the enactment? Councillor Orr?

Have not and will not.

I have not and I will not. By-laws 7 and 8 were from the public hearing on February 12, and 26, 2026. Councillor Frye was absent for this item at the public hearing. Councillor Frye, have you reviewed the proceedings and will you be voting? Right. Bylaw 9 was from the public hearing on February the 17th and March the 4th, 2026. Councillors Kirby Young and myself were absent for this item at the public hearing. Councillor Kirby Young, have you reviewed the proceedings and will you be voting? And I have not and I will not. Bylaw 10 was from the public hearing on February the 26th, 2026. Councillors Bly, Fry, Kirby Young, Joe and myself were absent for this item at public hearing. Councillor Bligh, have you reviewed the proceedings and will you be voting? Great. Councillor Fry? Councillor Kirby-Young? Councillor Zhou? Great. I have not and will not. As by-law 4 is subject to the approval of by-law 3, would someone like to move a motion to first adopt by-law 3? Councillor Claston, seconded by Councillor Dominato. Councillors are in discussion. All those in favour say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great. The motion carries unanimously. Would someone like to bring a motion to adopt the remaining bylaws? So that would be 1, 2, 4 through 23, 25, 30, 32 through 38. Moved by Councillor Domenato, seconded by Councillor Kirby-Young. Council, is there any discussion? All those in favour say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great. The motion carries unanimously. The list of approved bylaws can be found on the city's website. Administrative motions. Closure and exchange of portions of road adjacent to 961 West 19th Avenue. Before we begin this agenda item, are there any conflicts of interest to disclose?

Before we go there, council, are there any questions to team members? Great. So Councillor Domenato moved. It's seconded by Councillor Claston. Council, is there any discussion? All those in favour say yay. All those opposed say nay. Great. The motion carries unanimously. Item number two, adoption of amended Heatherlands design guidelines. Before we begin, any conflicts to disclose? Council, are there any questions to team members? Would someone like to move the motion? Councillor Dominato, thank you. Seconded by Councillor Kirby-Young, thank you. Council, is there any discussion? All those in favour, say yay. All those opposed, say nay. Great, the motion carries unanimously. Item number three, updating development contributions, a new framework for financing growth, 2027 through 2036. Before we begin, are there any conflicts to disclose? Council, are there any questions to team members? Would someone like to move a motion? Great. Councillor Dominato, seconded by Councillor Klassen. Councillor, there's any discussion? Okay. All those in favour, say aye. All those opposed, say nay. Great. The motion carries unanimously. Item number four, Villages Plant.

Oh, sorry. Thank you. There you go.

Okay. Notice the council member motions. Are there any notice of council member motions for the upcoming standing committee meetings? A reminder to please state the title of the motion and the date of the standing committee meeting on which you intend to move the motion and be sure to send the title and date of the standing committee meeting via email to the city clerk.

Okay. Counselor. Hold on a sec. Counselor Orr.

Thanks. I have a number of motions, and they're all for the Standing Committee November 18th. A motion titled Housing with Supports, Improving Public Safety by Tackling Root Causes. A motion titled Re-Energize Vancouver, Reducing Carbon Pollution in New and Existing Commercial and Multifamily Buildings. A motion titled Save the Caps, Working to Keep the White Caps in Vancouver. A motion titled Living It Up, Making the City of Vancouver a Livable Wage Employer Again. A motion titled Delivering on the Vancouver Social Housing Initiative. A motion titled No More Risky Business, Fair Leases for Small Businesses in Vancouver. A motion titled Stop the Gold Rush, Revisiting the Downtown Eastside Oppenheimer District Plan. A motion titled Fully Funding the Restorative Vancouver Framework. A motion titled Adopting a Ranked Ballot for Mayor. A motion titled Closing Landlord Loopholes, Advocating for Provincial Authority on Vacancy Control. A motion titled A Public Voice for Public Decisions, Strengthening Engagement in City Decision Making. A motion entitled An Improvement Tax on Unused and Underused Land. A motion titled Introducing the People's Audit. A motion titled Rainy Day Fund, Funding for a Covered Bench at Every Bus Stop in Vancouver. That's everything. Yeah, I mean... All for November 18th, yeah.

Silly season.

Okay. Okay. Yeah, we'll get him to send it in writing. Councillor Kirby Young.

Yeah, I just have one sole one. It may be silly season, but I don't need to be silly. I'm just going to be focused, and I'm going to deliver one, which is entitled to continuing to build a vibrant Vancouver.

Thank you very much. For the November 18th standing. Which standing committee meeting is that for?

For the November 18th standing committee. Thank you.

Thank you. Councillor Dominato.

Thanks, Mayor. I also have one notice of motion for the November 18th standing committee meeting entitled Growing a Stronger Future for Vancouver's Farmers' Markets.

Thank you. Councillor Maloney.

Thanks. I've got two motions for the November 18 Standing Committee meeting. The first one is strengthening safeguards against tax avoidance for unbuilt housing sites. And the second is reinstating the full-time seniors lead planner position to address ongoing support needs among seniors. Thanks.

Thanks, Chair. I am feeling a little inadequate to just posting one notice of motion, but the title is Bringing Forward Zero-Based Budgeting. It's for the Standing Committee of November 18, 2026, submitted by myself. Thanks.

And myself, I have two for the November 18th Standing Committee meeting. The first one is Ending the Pools Reservation System. And the second one is Upholding Public Safety. Counselor Zhou.

Yeah, thanks. Just one motion for the November 18th Standing Committee meeting. The title is Recognizing Chinese Heritage Month in the City of Vancouver.

Councillor Meiszner. Just one motion entitled Restoring Balance, Moving Away from OPS and Embracing Compassionate Intervention for November 18th Standing Committee. Thank you very much.

Okay, seeing no one else in the queue. New business. We have one item of new business on the agenda today and requests for leaves of absence. This motion has been circulated to council at the beginning of the meeting and is available on the screen.

So if that motion isn't moved or seconded, then it dies on the floor. So... Would someone like to move the motion? Okay, great. So that doesn't move, and so it's null and void. Council, are there any other items of new business?

Oh, sorry, Councillor.

Yeah, and I'm hoping Council will indulge. As we were all so consumed with our public hearings, I was forced to miss the Racial Ethno Advisory Committee meeting, and they had asked me to submit this motion, but I wasn't there. And we all... Yesterday morning celebrated Emancipation Day, which acknowledges the end of slavery, and it was recently adopted as a national observance. And the advisory committee had asked me to submit the motion asking council to approve Emancipation Day as an official observance among our official observances of the city of Vancouver. At current, it's really just an ad hoc proclamation by the mayor. And I think the substance is pretty clear here. And I do want to acknowledge and thank Councillor Domenato for helping me to bring this forward today.

Okay. Thank you very much. Council, any other items, any business? Seeing no one in the queue. Oh, Councillor Dominato. Okay. Is this new business or inquiries? Matters. Okay. Council, are there any inquiries or other matters? Councillor Dominato, please go ahead.

Yes, Mayor, through you to City Manager or Deputy City Manager. I've had inquiries from residents about the closure of New Brighton Pool due to mechanical problems, and the questions have been raised is how long will the pool be closed and will it be reopened before the summer's end? And so I'm curious if staff have that information readily available, and if not, could they circulate a memo to Council? I certainly would welcome that and noting that there is public interest in this and wanting to understand whether they'll have access to the pool for the remainder of the summer or not. My second item, Mayor, is, well, I know we're limited in terms of the staff that we have here in chambers right now, but I did want to personally extend my thanks and gratitude to city staff and all of the respective departments and roles that they fulfill here. Harnessing sort of my perspective of the three-legged stool of good governance and policy making in the world. I sort of view it as a three-legged stool is that we have different roles and responsibilities in delivering good policy and some of it starts from those in governing roles like us who run on platforms to deliver different actions that we think are gonna make a better city or a better community. Then there's our staff and management teams who play a critical role in delivering on that vision. But oftentimes, as I've learned, policymaking is not always driven by those who govern, but by the civil service staff who identify problems and issues that are emerging within neighborhoods or through policy and will identify those for those of us who are governing at council. And then there's the public and the stakeholder groups that we deal with and interface with. who they themselves, whether they're residents or businesses or industry groups, who identify emerging issues or challenges or things that need to be addressed through policy, that bring those up. They bring them up through us as elected officials. They also bring them up through staff as well. And in daylighting sort of that three-legged stool of policymaking, I wanted to showcase that it is an interconnected role of work of managing and governing in the best interests of citizens. And we do have different roles and responsibilities in doing that. But it's important work. And we do wear different hats. But it is a collaborative effort in delivering on that work. I wanted to express those thoughts today, given that this will be our last formal council meeting of the term. And I also wanted to extend, beyond the staff, my thanks to the public, but also thanks to my colleagues in the work that we're doing. We don't always agree. Oftentimes we have different perspectives, but I do believe that if you decide to put your name on a ballot and you decide to run for public office, it's because you care deeply about your community. You care deeply about what you represent. And so we may not always agree on the path forward, but I think we oftentimes actually do agree on ultimately the outcomes that we want to achieve in our city and civil society. And so as we enter into the campaign field, there'll be a lot of differentiation and so on about how different we are. But my experience has been as often we have more points of agreement than we do difference at this table. And so I wanted to thank my colleagues for everything they put in, our political staff, our clerks, and the rest of the city teams. And of course, our media as well, who joined us in here every now and then. So thank you, Mayor, for that opportunity.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I was going to crack a joke, but I won't. Okay.

Seeing no one else in the queue, may we have a motion to adjourn? Great. Was that Councillor Meiszner? Thank you. Seconded by Councillor Klassen. All those in favour, say yay. All those opposed, say nay. Great. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you, everyone.