MINUTES OF THE 2000-JUL-31 MEETING OF THE TWENTY-FIRST COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NANAIMO, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL, COMMENCING AT 7:00 P.M.

PRESENT: His Worship Mayor G. Korpan, Chair

Members: Councillor R. A. Cantelon Councillor W. J. Holdom Councillor S. A. Lance Councillor L. D. McNabb Councillor D. E. Rispin Councillor L. J. Sherry

Absent: Councillor T. J. Beech Councillor T. K. Krall

Staff: G. D. Berry B. N. Mehaffey A. C. Kenning S. E. Fletcher T. M. Hickey J. T. Bowden D. L. King L. Mitchell

1. ADOPTION OF MINUTES:

(a) Minutes of the 2000-JUL-10 Meeting of the Twenty-First Council of the City of Nanaimo held in the Council Chamber, City Hall at 7:00 p.m.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the Minutes be adopted as circulated. The motion carried.

2. INTRODUCTION OF LATE ITEMS:

(a) Councillor Sherry advised that Mr. Jonathan Berry was in attendance and wished to address Council as a late delegation regarding the removal of a rock bluff and damage to a tree at Milton and Hecate Streets.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that Mr. Berry be permitted to address Council as a late delegation with a five-minute time limitation. The motion carried.

(b) Mayor Korpan advised that Ms. Pauline O'Carroll was in attendance and wished to address Council as a late delegation regarding the rezoning of property at 202 and 206 Haliburton Street.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor Holdom that Ms. O'Carroll be permitted to address Council as a late delegation with a five-minute time limitation. The motion carried.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 2

(c) Councillor McNabb advised that Ms. Alison Donaghey, was in attendance and wished to address Council to request the waiving of the $1,000. fine for her dog that was impounded by the Nanaimo Animal Shelter.

Moved by Councillor McNabb, seconded by Councillor Cantelon that Ms. Donaghey be permitted to address Council as a late delegation with a five-minute time limitation. The motion carried.

(d) Mayor Korpan advised that the following items had been distributed prior to the meeting:

• City Manager's Supplemental Report • Supplemental Information Only Report

3. RECEIVING OF DELEGATIONS:

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the Delegations be permitted to address Council. The motion carried.

(a) Ms. Marianne Erb, Oliver Rutherford Community Association, requesting that Ms. Judy Bledsoe and Mr. Allen Coleman each be permitted 10 minutes to make presentations to Council regarding the proposed North End Recreation Centre and High School.

Ms. Bledsoe and Mr. Coleman were previously authorized to address Council.

Mr. Coleman stated that:

- he resides at 5183 Sam's Way in Nanaimo. - at the last Council meeting he was told that the proposed Oliver Road high school/recreation centre "is going to happen". - he enquired if there were any Councillors that oppose this project. - they are receiving mixed information and requested clarification as to how this arrangement came about - whether the School Board approached the City or vice versa.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

Ms. Bledsoe stated that:

- she is a member of the Oliver Rutherford Community Association and has lived in Nanaimo for 27 years. - for the last three years she has lived in the Longwood Development at 5650 Edgewater Lane. - at no time during this period has she heard anyone from the Insight team try to lead owners or potential buyers to believe that the proposed recreation centre for Oliver Road was at all exclusive for the use of Longwood residents, as has been quoted in the paper recently. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 3

- she strongly objects to being told that they as taxpayers have elected Council and School Trustees to make decisions for them. - she also objects to being told that the Oliver Road project is a "done deal" when they can't get any information from anyone and there is no consultation with the taxpayers in that area. - she believes that they, as taxpayers, elected each of the Council members and the School Trustees to ensure that our Official Community Plan is followed, and this includes the consultation process. - her whole issue is the process. - she knows that she speaks for many of the homeowners that live in this neighbourhood. - last week the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission listened to what they had to say and were impressed at the homework that had been done. - they were going to recommend that the signing of the Joint Use Agreement for this project be delayed for 90 days so information can be shared openly with the taxpayers and those people who are concerned about this project. - she is not an expert when it comes to site selection for community recreation centres, schools or parks, but she does have expertise on the value of inclusion in the decision-making process. - she understands that inclusion creates win-win outcomes for all participants. - her expertise comes from many years of community involvement, starting with her children - she was an active member in the Parent Advisory Committees, and has lived beside two schools and knows what impact schools have on neighbourhoods. - she was a member of the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission many years ago; she chairs the Strata Council at Longwood; she has been President of the Community Living Association; and she teaches a program at Malaspina University- College in which they spend half of their time in the community. - this process of consultation is very important when you are working with students and other people in the community. - she believes that since ORCA has been unable to obtain any documentation that supports the Oliver Rutherford location as the best site for a school, she asked Council to support the recommendation from the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission that the signing of the Joint Use Agreement for this project be tabled until the October 2000 meeting. - this 90-day period will allow them to be part of some consultative process and an opportunity to openly share the information that is so hard for the members of ORCA to get their hands on. - they need to know that this site is the best location for a school, not an appropriate location as was reported in the local paper.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(b) Mr. Tom Harris, St. John Ambulance Building Committee, regarding a proposal to the City of Nanaimo to grant St. John Ambulance a long-term lease at a nominal price on a parcel of City-owned land located at 2250 Labieux Road.

Mr. Harris was previously authorized to address Council.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 4

Mr. Harris stated that:

- he hopes that his presentation will be neither contentious or controversial, but a win-win situation for everybody. - in attendance with him were Mr. Charles Whisker, Chairman of the Board of St. John Ambulance in Nanaimo; Mr. Jack Patton, Supt. of the Brigade; and Mr. Will Melville, an Architect that has been retained by their Building Committee.

Mr. Patton stated that:

- there is a lot of mist in regards to St. John, you only see one or two uniforms every now and again, but of course they are multiplied by the amount of activities that are taking place each weekend. - the first contact in Nanaimo of the St. John movement was brought over by the early coal miners, as a matter of self-interest to the safety and well-being of the miners and their families. - the mine owners encouraged them as it was health care "on the cheap". - the Priory of St. John in Canada is headed by Her Majesty the Queen, through the Governor General and the local Prior of British Columbia who is Garde Gardom, Lieutenant Governor. - the local St. John is administered and financed by the Board or Branch Committee which organizes the training classes of non-members and raises money to supply the uniform brigade and cadets with uniforms, equipment, training quarters and first aid supplies. - the branch is completely self-sufficient and controls these local units entirely on a volunteer basis and is financed completely by charitable contributions with no help from the public purse. - some training classes realize some revenue, but the bulk of the training is entirely volunteer. - the branch is grateful to the United Way and other charitable donations which help it to conduct itself for the betterment of this community. - the Uniform Brigade, which is his, is the most visible part of St. John. - their Brigade members are seen all over the community as emergency first-aid volunteers maintaining a presence at a wide variety of events for the public good of the City and its citizens. - last year over 8,000 hours of volunteer time were put in by his Brigade for absolutely no financial return, other than the donations by those groups that can afford to. - they do not differentiate amongst the different groups on a basis of donation and he will not bore Council with the list of the dozens of events that their members attend. - if you put a dollar value on those hours, you are reasonably looking at $100,000. per year, at $10.00 per hour, which is free medical service to this City for the last 100 years at least. - members also attend two training nights per month to maintain and upgrade their first aid skills, and they must also re-qualify once a year and attend training seminars for national emergency procedures. - all members must pass security and record checks with the R.C.M.P.; they also get drug training, as well as communication techniques and procedures from the R.C.M.P. - dedication is not a strong enough word to describe the members of St. John Ambulance. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 5

- apart from buying some of their own uniform and equipment supplies, their members take turns to help raise funds for the branch, which means extra volunteer time. - they maintain a volunteer emergency response team that will man ambulances in case of national or local emergencies, such as earthquakes and serious catastrophes. - along with this team is a constantly maintained emergency response first-aid supplies kit that, at the moment, is stored in a vulnerable building and may not be able to be accessed in extreme cases of emergency. - there are three St. John Ambulance Cadet Corps in Nanaimo - the Juniors, Cadets and Crusaders. - just three weeks ago over 80 Cadets met in a church basement and it was jammed. - they have an adult staff of five uniformed members and are taught first aid to a variety of standards according to age. - the Crusaders are extremely competent in their training and have won numerous awards in their competitions. - the staff of the Cadets are trained to a high standard and have to re-qualify as seniors do and are obliged to have the necessary police checks. - the Therapy Dog Program consists of standard first aid handlers and their dogs that have been certified by the administration. - they visit the elderly at hospitals and seniors homes and the interaction between the pets and the aged and infirm act as a therapy to their treatment. - it has long been recognized that pets of this nature have a great therapeutic benefit to the aged and infirm; this is a very touching service to those members of our City that are too infirm to be able to do very much with their lives. - they visit the Nanaimo and Ladysmith hospitals, and the six seniors homes in the community. - they also have a Provincial Emergency team, with an ambulance supplied that they maintain and insure, along with a trauma team. - it is maintained right now in a building that is not earthquake-proof.

Mr. Harris stated that:

- St. John has many problems with being spread out all over the community with the Cadets meeting in a church basement on Fourth Street, the office and training being done in rented facilities on Madsen Road across from B.C. Hydro, and the emergency ambulance being stored sometimes at Departure Bay Firehall, sometimes at Labieux Road. - they would like to build a permanent facility for St. John Ambulance. - the Building Committee has been doing some fund-raising and was initially chaired by Jack Fyfe, but when he passed away they put the pieces back together and have raised bout $100,000. so far. - they would find themselves extremely challenged if they have to raise the money to buy the land as well as put up a building. - they have identified a site at 2250 Labieux Road with the help of some members of Staff who have been most gracious and helpful to them over the last year. - Mr. Melville will explain what they propose to build if they can get this site from the City.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 6

Mr. Melville stated that:

- he has had the pleasure of working with the Building Committee over the last year or more to help them develop some conceptual plans and to establish requirements for their facility. - their plan is site specific, they looked at the site at Labieux Road to determine its suitability in terms of the site's configuration, access locations, neighbouring uses, and topography. - a single-level building would be too sprawling and would take up an extraordinary amount of land, so is not the most economical package. - one of the attractions of this particular site is that it enables them to stack some of the uses - on the lower floor they can house the ambulance bays, meeting spaces and some support services. - on the floor above is the main classroom area, some administrative areas, washroom and kitchen facilities and a main entrance foyer. - another aspect of this site that may at first seem challenging, but is really an asset, is that there is a degree of crossfall down Labieux Road, and to that end it really works to their advantage because they can gain handicap access to both floors. - in terms of their exterior treatments, they have put together a fairly economical building envelope for this group and finished it off and detailed it in such a way that it is compatible with adjacent uses.

Mr. Harris stated that:

- as Council has seen, they have designed a nice building that works well on the site. - because of the fall and because they will more or less have a basement in it, they are able to create some additional meeting room space that will not be utilized full time by St. John and will be made available to other groups within the community that wish to use it from time to time. - the attached kitchen facility, will be an additional community benefit. - he asked, on behalf of St. John and the Building Committee, if the City would consider leasing them this property on a long-term basis at a very nominal charge, and also consider the 50 percent reduction in Development Cost Charges, which he understands is more or less a given with buildings of this type. - they could then go forward and raise the rest of the money, which he is 100 percent confident they could do. - people on the Committee have a background in local fundraising and he guaranteed that this is not going to be a repeat of other situations that have happened in the past.

Moved by Councillor Lance, seconded by Councillor Rispin that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

Moved by Councillor Cantelon, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the motion regarding the St. John Ambulance Training Centre under Any Other Competent Business be brought forward for consideration at this time. The motion carried.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 7

Moved by Councillor Cantelon, seconded by Councillor Lance that Council support the lease of City-owned land at 2250 Labieux Road for use as a St. John Ambulance Training Centre, subject to appropriate rezoning, at an annual lease cost of $1.00. The motion carried.

(c) Mr. R. K. Brown, Consultant Planner, Keith Brown Associates Ltd., regarding the proposed Official Community Plan Amendment for 2421, 2425, and 2429 Bowen Road.

Mr. Brown was previously authorized to address Council.

Mr. Brown stated that:

- when they received the Staff report on this application, they were disheartened, but not surprised with the negative spin given to describing the application. - the report states that "this application is not significantly different from the application in the previous Official Community Plan (OCP) Review period for this site", which was the former 24-hour gas bar/convenience store. - one is left with the distinct impression that the concept of use has been distorted at the expense of a sound proposal which indeed does respond to the many concerns raised in the past by the residents/property owners and the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee (PNAC) members. - in fact, it was the spirit of the PNAC members' discussions in the previous deliberations which provided the guidance and encouragement to resubmit an OCP application respecting concerns past raised in conjunction with a re-defined site development plan. - PNAC has approved this application by consensus, with two of the members in the minority agreeing that the proposal was more fitting but for other reasons were not supportive at this time. - the present application represents a mixed use commercial/residential development comprising approximately 50 percent offices and 50 percent retail space, with 4 - 5 apartments on the second storey, representing an excellent and appropriate mix as per OCP guidelines and PNAC. - the conceptual site plan proposes a group of three buildings each of 2 storeys. - the buildings are sited fronting Bowen and Labieux Roads with rear yard parking, with access from Labieux Road/lane and from Bowen Road. - the site grading requires raising the rear property line abutting the lane with a concrete retaining wall extending along the rear property line to the point of access. - the building design reflects residential roof lines and dormers providing enhancement and compatibility with the adjacent residential properties. - the City's OCP requires that, through the rezoning process, the applicant shall provide a public amenity. - subject to the City's approval, they requested that the public amenity be directed to the development of playground equipment for the "park lot" located on Brackenwood Place. - they are in the process of meeting with the residents and property owners in the immediate area. - he feels that it is important that Council become aware of the very large area comprising many neighbourhoods extending from the easterly side of the Boban Industrial Park along Jingle Pot Road and Labieux Road to Bowen Road. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 8

- this large residential area is void of neighbourhood commercial services and as such the services to the neighbourhoods can only be provided on the periphery. - the application now being presented reflects this development pattern. - given this proposal, it is quite apparent that the application is significantly different from previous site applications. - they seek Council's approval in keeping with the proposed Concept Plan being presented in support of the OCP amendment.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor Cantelon that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(d) Ms. Tammy Hall, representative of Brackenwood Residential Group, regarding the proposed Official Community Plan Amendment for 2421, 2425, and 2429 Bowen Road.

Ms. Hall was previously authorized to address Council.

Ms. Hall stated that:

- she lives at 2382 Brackenwood Place and wished to address Council regarding the possible rezoning from single family residential to C-4 zoning. - they feel the applicant, Mr. Hans Heringa is not proposing anything significantly different from the previous application which Council recently turned down, and Staff concur that fact in their current report. - on 2000-FEB-28, Council voted in favour of the Staff recommendation to not proceed with redesignation of the three lots in question, and they are urging Council to do the same now. - Plan Nanaimo identifies their area as a neighbourhood, and they would like it to remain so; they are not a Town Centre, a Neighborhood Village or a Local Service Centre. - the proposed amendment suggests that the applicant could provide better services to the neighbourhood; the residents question how, when they already have a multiple of services bordering their viable community. - City Staff reiterate in the current report to Council that the site is well served by nearby commercial uses and community facilities. - they feel there is no need, as the applicant wishes, to consider the property for Local Service zoning. - at the same time it is the applicant's belief that this corner property is not suitable for multi family use, but this is not the opinion of all. - at the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee (PNAC) meeting held 2000-JUN-20 it was commented in the minutes that "multi-family residential could work on this site with the park across the street and the proximity of the recreation center and easy access to shopping, and the integrity of the area would be compromised if commercial were to be allowed on this site." - in past reports Staff have acknowledged the poor access of this property for commercial use, and she enquired why this application is even being considered. - past comments made by Staff also indicate that this is a stable residential area, and in Staff's review of the property at the time of the 7-Eleven proposal, Staff indicated that if the zoning was altered it would only be the beginning of more strip commercial development in their neighbourhood. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 9

- they feel that if this application is approved, Council will be leaving the door open for others to follow, and what would happen to the character of the neighbourhood then? - as many of the neighbours are on vacation, she read statements from many of them. - since 1995, their neighbourhood has taken an active role in the development of their community. - both PNAC and the City have acknowledged their presence, but not the applicant. - she has been told by the developer that the proposal was finalized, except for some fine tuning; that doesn't leave much consultation from the neighbourhood does it? - she finds it frustrating that he will not sit down with them in the initial stages and listen to their wishes. - she asked that Council send a strong message to the applicant, Mr. Hans Heringa, that the neighbourhood wishes to take an active role in the planning process and not as a token effort, in hopes of alleviating neighbourhood opposition. - in conclusion, they are currently a stable and viable residential community. - she enquired how they can preserve the integrity of their neighbourhood if commercial development is allowed to creep into their community? - once established, the potential is there for a strip mall to develop on adjacent properties, and that is not what Plan Nanaimo envisions for this area, nor is it what the people of this neighbourhood wish to see. - based on this information, the Brackenwood Residential Group does not support this proposed OCP amendment.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(e) Ms. Jane Kelly, 263 Cilaire Drive, Nanaimo, regarding her opposition to the building plan for the property located at 435 Terminal Avenue, North.

Ms. Kelly was previously authorized to address Council.

Ms. Kelly stated that:

- she is the owner of Cassidy Inn (1981) Ltd. which owns the property next door to the proposed development at 435 North Terminal Avenue. - they were in attendance to again voice their objections and concerns for the plans for the proposed stores at 435 North Terminal. - in her quest to gain inches for their building, a more serious issue was not addressed publicly, and she feels it will not only affect their building next door, but the neighbourhood and the whole City of Nanaimo. - their area is plagued with prostitutes and the paraphernalia of the trade; the prostitutes can be found on the corner of Rosehill Street and North Terminal Avenue any time of the day. - a neighbourhood group was formed some time ago to address the problems of the area; but this business continues to thrive. - North Terminal Avenue is a gateway to our rather unique downtown and she believes it deserves all our consideration. - she would like to first address the close proximity to their building as it was the focus of her last presentation. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 10

- the developer and the architect had thought that was extra space between the driveway and the sidewalk which would allow enough access to their stucco wall to install scaffolding for necessary repairs. - second floor windows protrude out one foot six inches to the lot line leaving approximately two feet between their roof and her windows. - anyone accessing their roof will be able to walk into the suite through the dining room or bedroom window, compromising her tenants safety. - these windows provide light and air to both of these rooms and are opened frequently; the plan as it stands just does not work for them in any way. - the other issue addressed at the last presentation to Council was with regards to the required variance for reduced parking - they have noticed that the size of the building was not reduced to help meet the parking requirements. - is it logical to assume from this parking variance request that they anticipate a lot of local pedestrian traffic at their stores? - they themselves do not have enough parking at various times - are they both going to be looking to Rosehill Street to solve their parking needs. - how and where will they handle the receiving of their merchandise? - the plan shows only one entry and exit door to both the stores, which by the way faces the driveway and the 7-Eleven store. - at their location, when the stores are taking deliveries, the trucks take up a good portion of the parking lot and require room to maneuver. - as their parking is visible from the street, customers can make the decision to park elsewhere when the delivery trucks are on site, when the parking lot is full. - but the new stores' customers will have to drive to the rear of the building before they can make a choice, which can lead to a lot of unnecessary entering and exiting onto an already busy North Terminal Avenue. - the Official Community Plan for this area dictates that the new building be moved forward on the lot. - this positioning of the stores to the front of the lot has created a secluded parking lot, encouraging the sex and drug trade to thrive. - the west wall of their building offers no visibility to the parking lot because high fences and mature shrubbery provide privacy on the other side. - they feel that this plan will only encourage the activity that is the most detrimental to the overall health of the entire business, residential and school area of Brechin. - they have to ask at this point why the developer was not told he could apply to be exempted from the OCP. - given the history of the problems that plague the area, they suggest that the plan be reviewed by the R.C.M.P. for a crime prevention environmental study as they are very aware of the problems of the neighbourhood. - the owner of the new development has told them that the building is to house a lingerie shop. - she finds the name vague and somewhat confusing because in the phone book under lingerie stores one finds listings for adult entertainment products and services. - why would a lingerie shop, as we know it, even locate in this area - why not in a high traffic mall? - are they to assume that the store may be locating to take advantage of an existing customer base for the sex trade? - they have been told by the City that a lingerie shop or even an adult X-rated store meets with the zoning for this lot. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 11

- what are the Provincial application requirements and regulations and where and how is the public advised in this process? - will the already organized Brechin community watchgroup be advised if an application is filed with the Attorney General's office for this location? - they feel that after looking carefully at the plan, the rear store of this building is designed for a specific business that does not require many windows. - it would not readily be adapted to accommodate other retail or commercial endeavours. - the building is to be built of brick and it will be there for the long term. - as business people, they appreciate the frustration the owner of the company has had spending an unanticipated $30,000. getting their plans to meet City requirements to satisfy the Official Community Plan, but feel strongly that the surrounding area residents, businesses and City have a lot more to lose if this plan, as it stands, is successful. - she asked Council to please consider this application for variances carefully, and recommend that a crime prevention study be initiated. - they feel that we must all work together to eradicate the problems in this area by being vigilant to any situation that may take advantage of or encourage the present problems to thrive.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(f) Ms. Jacqueline Wareham, 109 Milton Street, Nanaimo, regarding maintaining the integrity of the cultural landscape in the Old City Neighbourhood. (This item was brought forward from the Delegation Section at the end of the agenda.)

Ms. Wareham was previously authorized to address Council.

Ms. Wareham stated that:

- she specifically wished to address the planned upgrades to Milton Street between Old Victoria Road and Fitzwilliam Street. - she has a petition with 120 signatures requesting that the City cancel the blasting plan for the rock at the corner of Hecate and Milton Streets, and that the local residents be allowed to take part in all further decisions about the Milton Street roadway. - this petition is in addition to the 120 signatures that were submitted by Mr. Victor Dalin on May 1. - there are many definitions of what a cultural landscape is, but basically it is any natural place that has been altered by man. - it is a weaving together of many elements: sidewalks, buildings, landscape features, gardens, setbacks, retaining walls, boulevards, trees and native plants, etc. - it is also the weaving together of nature, development, history and people. - it is a record of the people who have created the landscape and a reflection of the people who inhabit it today. - cultural landscape may be found in the form of parks, gardens, streetscapes, neighbourhoods, individual buildings and grounds and cities. - why is the cultural landscape of Milton Street important? COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 12

- to understand this, you must look at Milton Street in the context of Nanaimo's historic Old City. - the Old City is mainly a residential neighbourhood which embraces the downtown core and provides homes for residents who love the heritage, charm and character of the area. - they also appreciate the convenient closeness to downtown services to which they can walk or ride their bikes. - the people who live in this area value the reminders that the particular and unique streetscape of the neighbourhood bring to mind. - with every glance at concrete sidewalks, boulevards, natural features, gardens, mature trees and character homes, we are reminded of times seemingly gone by. - when the pace of life was slower, people knew their neighbours, children played in the streets and there was an abundance of time to make those human connections that ultimately create community. - these are important values to the residents of the Old City. - but more than just serving the local residents, the heritage neighbourhood of the Old City is important to all Nanaimoites because it is here that we find our link to the past, to the settlers who founded and developed the City; to our mining and commercial roots, and to the entire story of our time in this place. - this is the type of resource that is necessary to the psyche of a healthy and prospering City. - take away our history and you take away our soul; take away our past and you limit our prospects for the future. - the maintenance of the Old City heritage character is not optional, it is necessary to the future of a strong and vibrant City. - the City of Nanaimo Heritage Action Plan indicates that the preservation of the heritage character of this area has been stated as a planning goal to be pursued starting this year. - by allowing the development of Milton Street as a connector road and proceeding with the proposed re-design of the street, she feels Council is destroying the vital ingredients before the fact. - the Plan also indicates that until further conservation measures can be defined, the City should work towards ongoing preservation of heritage resources in this area. - the Plan further recommends that the City adopt a policy of using historically appropriate street furnishings within the Old City neighbourhood. - she asked why the policy of using historically appropriate street furnishings has been completely ignored in the current plans for the re-design of Milton Street, and also why residents have never been included in the planning stages of traffic design which directly affects their lives? - Milton Street is mainly a residential street which runs directly through the very heart of the Old City neighbourhood, rich in heritage features; the heritage inventory list notes the importance of the street, referring to the ambience of Milton Street which still maintains much of its Victorian and Edwardian housing stock. - but a street is more than the sum of it's housing stock, it's the entire cultural landscape which is of value. - the City's plans for the Old Victoria Road to Fitzwilliam Street section of Milton Street can in no way be said to be in accord with the Heritage Action Plan or with Plan Nanaimo. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 13

- replacing existing concrete sidewalks with asphalt sidewalks and the removal of the boulevards, thus placing the sidewalk directly next to the road, and funneling ever- increasing amounts of traffic along the road from the Island Highway and from Fitzwilliam Street degrades the heritage ambiance of the street and in addition, is pedestrian unfriendly. - in its plans for the upgrade and re-design of Milton Street, the City is chopping out huge pieces of cultural fabric of the Old City, pulling out the thread of the boulevards, the concrete sidewalks in favour of asphalt, and two or three old time homes to expand the R.C.M.P. parking lot, blasting the beautiful, unique and rare landscape of the rock face near Hecate Street, taking away green space to install turning lanes, funneling traffic down Milton Street. - she foresees the time when the City has pulled out so many of the threads of the cultural fabric of Milton Street that it is completely destroyed. - there will be a gaping corridor filled with nothing but asphalt and cars rushing to get somewhere else, slicing the Old City neighbourhood in two. - who will want to live on Milton Street then? Who will want to move there and upgrade the heritage character when the fabric has been thus shredded? - today Council is planning these changes to this portion of the Old City, what concerns them is when Council is through with the entire Old City neighbourhood, what will be left? - what use will the Heritage Action Plan be then and what cost to the City's potential revenue from the currently grossly underdeveloped resource of cultural tourism? - who then will want to live in the Old City and who will be spending their shopping dollars to revitalize our downtown? - a well-kept, well-developed heritage area attracts money to the City through cultural tourism and attracts homeowners who will add to the value of their property and will want to support the services in a well-developed commercial district. - maintaining the cultural landscape of the Old City, maintaining and improving the livability here is vital to the downtown revitalization movement. - it is important to state that she is not against change or progress and development, but she certainly will stand up and say that she is against this type of change which can lead only to the destruction of one of Nanaimo's greatest, most important resources - the Old City neighbourhood. - all citizens should be deeply concerned about the City's plans for our future; we simply cannot afford the loss of the heritage features of Milton Street, not just for its own sake, but for what it implies for the Old City, the downtown area and the cultural fabric of the City of Nanaimo as a whole. - she requested that the City delay all of the proposed upgrades and re-designing of the Victoria Road to Fitzwilliam Street section of Milton Street including Item No. 14 of the City Manager's report approving the contract for the right-turn lane from Fitzwilliam onto Milton, and the blasting of the cliff face at Hecate Street until the following three measures have been achieved: • the process of designating the Old City neighbourhood as a heritage conservation area is complete, • the residents of the Old City neighbourhood have been thoroughly included in the planning process of traffic design that directly affects their lives; and, • the economic implications for the Old City neighbourhood and the downtown area have been thoroughly evaluated.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 14

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(g) Ms. Pauline O'Carroll, 562 Toronto Street, Victoria, B.C., regarding the rezoning of property at 202 and 206 Haliburton Street.

Ms. O'Carroll was previously authorized to address Council.

Ms. O'Carroll stated that:

- she is the owner of two small properties at the corner of Haliburton and Milton Streets. - she has asked for them to be redesignated, with the smaller one to be rezoned to C-4 commercial to match its neighbour. - she is trying to rationalize these lots - the corner lot is 7,500 square feet, and has C-4 zoning, but you can't really do anything with a lot that small with this type of zoning. - on the adjacent 4,000 square feet, the house burned down at 206 Haliburton Street, and she has been told that the zoning would allow townhouses, except that it is so small. - if this smaller parcel could be rezoned C-4, then joined with the other for a total of 11,500 square feet, it would be possible to do something better with it in the future than the eyesore that the whole place is at the moment. - she pointed out that the 200-block of Haliburton Street has had commercial zoning at each end for at least 75 years, possibly longer. - further along Haliburton Street there are pubs, second hand shops and all kinds of commercial. - kitty-corner to her property is a garage, selling and repairing cars and operating a taxi service; across Milton is the Shell Station and MacDonald's Restaurant. - in back of 206 and 202 Haliburton Street on the other side of the back lane is the Nanaimo Yamaha Centre, and she would like to approach the owners with the possibility of leasing them the empty lot for boat storage, but without C zoning she can't do this. - she appreciates the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee (PNAC) wanting to see family housing because of the school and park, but she feels this is "pie in the sky". - in the meantime you have unofficial commercial activity in the form of crack-cocaine selling houses, which don't have to be rezoned before City Council; however, she doesn't see how this could delight the neighbourhood committee, and it is right across from the park and the school. - it has been suggested to her that "hard-to house" housing be put there one day, but she sees that as totally not the thing to put across from a park and a school - you only need one hint of pedophilia or needles, etc. and all the parents would get alarmed. - nobody wants to see the south end upgraded more than she does. - she has been chasing prostitutes from the Milton Street/Haliburton Street corner, shutting down crack operations and youth hangouts in her own properties, and she cringes when she hears that it says on the Internet that Haliburton Street is the best place to look for prostitutes. - she would like the whole neighbourhood cleaned up, but while the Balmoral stripper bar is on the next block, multi-family isn't going to go in there, no philanthropist is rich enough to attempt it. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 15

- in the meantime, there could be some nice little, respectable commercial business there, where currently there is an eyesore at 202 and 206 Haliburton Street. - she added that the rest of the block is within the circle of the neighbourhood village, while her two properties are outside that circle. - the downtown designation stops at an odd angle, about 6 or 7 feet short of her properties. - she urged Council to override PNAC's negative recommendation and rezone the small 4,000 square foot lot at 206 Haliburton Street to C-4 zoning. - she sees it as a tidying up operation and a rationalization of the present inconsistent situation with zoning that renders both properties practically useless.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

4. MAYOR’S REPORT:

(a) Recommendations from Mayor's Task Force on Economic Development, Tourism and Conferencing

At its meetings held Wednesday, 2000-JUL-19 and Wednesday, 2000-JUL-26, the Mayor’s Task Force on Economic Development, Tourism, and Conferencing considered various requests for funding.

The Task Force approved funding to be allocated as follows:

Project Funding Nanaimo District Museum - Bastion Summer Program (extend to end $ 2,000 of Sept.) Nanaimo District Museum - Cannon Carriage Restoration Project $ 5,000 Downtown Nanaimo Information Centre (extend to end of year) $14,000 Nanaimo District Museum – Wellington Coal Locomotive Restoration $10,000 Project Nanaimo Tourist & Convention Bureau – Print Media Campaign and $30,000 Reinstating Presence on Ferries and the I-5 Corridor

The funding for these allocations is from the budget allocated for the Mayor’s Task Force. A summary of the Task Force budget was attached, for Council’s information.

Recommendation: That Council approve the allocation of funding to the Nanaimo District Museum, the Downtown Information Centre, and Nanaimo Tourist & Convention Bureau as outlined in the report.

Moved by Councillor Cantelon, seconded by Councillor Rispin that the report be received and the recommendation of the Mayor's Task Force be adopted. The motion carried. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 16

(b) Proclamations:

(i) Requests for Proclamations

Moved by Councillor Holdom, seconded by Councillor Lance that Staff be directed to prepare a report reviewing Council's options for dealing with proclamation requests. The motion carried.

(ii) Ms. Michelle Hynes, Program Director, Youth Volunteer Corps, requesting that 2000-AUG-12 be proclaimed "NATIONAL VOLUNTEAM DAY" in the City of Nanaimo.

Moved by Councillor Cantelon, seconded by Councillor Rispin that 2000-AUG-12 be proclaimed "NATIONAL VOLUNTEAM DAY" in the City of Nanaimo. The motion carried.

5. REPORTS OF SOCIETIES, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES:

(a) Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee - Official Community Plan Amendments - Review Period May 2000 - November 2000

PNAC met to discuss the OCP amendments and prepare recommendations for Council (see Appendix I for PNAC minutes):

PNAC sought to achieve consensus in their recommendations for Council. However, the Committee agreed that if consensus was not reached, both the majority and the minority views would be presented to Council with their respective rationales.

External Applications (see Appendix II for details)

Application 00-01, 202 and 206 Haliburton Street: To allow the rezoning of the residential property for commercial use and consolidate it with the adjacent commercial property.

PNAC recommends, with consensus, that Council not forward the proposed amendment to redesignate the property at 202 and 206 Haliburton Street from Neighbourhood to Town Centre designation.

Application 00-02, 3945 Biggs Road: To change a portion of the Neighbourhood designated property to Service Industrial and adjusting Neighbourhood policy to allow additional density.

PNAC recommends, with consensus, that Council direct Staff to delay this application until further negotiations to resolve problems can be held between the property owner, the neighbourhood and the City.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 17

Application 00-03: 426 Fitzwilliam Street: To enable infill development of more than 50 percent of the land area.

The majority recommendation (8 members) that Council direct Staff to prepare an OCP amendment to the Plan to redesignate the property at 426 Fitzwilliam Street from Mixed Multi-family/Commercial to Central Commercial designation.

Application 00-04: 2421, 2425, 2429 Bowen Road: To allow a commercial/ residential land use.

The majority recommendation (9 members) that Council direct Staff to prepare an OCP amendment to the Plan to redesignate the property at 2421, 2425, 2429 Bowen Road from Neighbourhood to Local Service Centre designation provided the neighbourhood is consulted and uses deemed inappropriate by the neighbourhood are covenanted out.

PNAC recommends, with consensus, that Council direct Staff to prepare a Bylaw to include the following proposed amendments:

• To adjust Parkway policies to reflect figures within the Parkway Design Guidelines • To rename ALR and FLR Commissions to Land Reserve Commission. • Technical Amendments which renumber existing policies.

Recommendations: That Council:

1. accept the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee’s consensus recommendation and not forward the proposed amendment to redesignate the property at 202 and 206 Haliburton Street from Neighbourhood to Town Centre designation;

2. accept the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee’s consensus recommendation and delay the proposed amendment to redesignate the property at 3945 Biggs Road from Neighbourhood to Service Industrial and adjust Neighbourhood policies to allow additional density in a Neighbourhood area;

3. accept the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee’s majority recommendation and direct Staff to prepare an OCP Amendment Bylaw to redesignate the property at 426 Fitzwilliam Street from Mixed Multi-family/Commercial to Central Commercial designation;

4. accept the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee’s majority recommendations and direct Staff to prepare an OCP Amendment Bylaw, following neighbourhood consultation, to redesignate the property at 2421, 2425 and 2429 Bowen Road from Neighbourhood to a Local Service Centre designation which includes residential and covenants out those uses deemed inappropriate by the Neighbourhood, and

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 18

5. accept the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee’s consensus recommendation and direct staff to prepare an OCP Amendment for the following proposed amendments: Parkway policy adjustment; renaming ALR and FLR Commissions, and technical amendments.

Recommendation No. 1:

Moved by Councillor Lance, seconded by Councillor Holdom that the report be received and that Recommendation No. 1 be adopted. The motion carried.

Recommendation No. 2:

Moved by Councillor Lance, seconded by Councillor Holdom that Recommendation No. 2 be adopted. The motion carried.

Recommendation No. 3:

Moved by Councillor Lance, seconded by Councillor McNabb that Recommendation No. 3 be adopted. The motion carried.

Recommendation No. 4:

Moved by Councillor Lance, seconded by Councillor Cantelon that Recommendation No. 4 be adopted. The motion carried.

Recommendation No. 5:

Moved by Councillor Lance, seconded by Councillor Sherry that Recommendation No. 5 be adopted. The motion carried.

(b) Grants Advisory Committee - 2000 Grants Advisory Committee Recommendations

A report was attached from Mr. Blake McGuffie, Chairperson of the Grants Advisory Committee making the following recommendations:

Recommendations:

1. That Council approve a Travel Grant to following applicant:

BMX Association (Pat Knowles/Tom Ellis) $100.00

2. That Council approve Permissive Tax Exemptions to following applicants:

Central Vancouver Island Multicultural Society Nanaimo Women’s Resources Society

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 19

3. That Council not award grants to the following applicants at this time:

Community Service Hart Project Society Planned Parenthood Association Nanaimo Branch Nanaimo & Region Independent Living Resource Centre Association

Other Grants Nanaimo Gymnastics School

Permissive Taxation Exemption Nanaimo Employment Opportunity Advocacy Society Central Vancouver Island Health Region - Nanaimo Home Support

Moved by Councillor Cantelon, seconded by Councillor Lance that the report of the Grants Advisory Committee be received and the recommendations be adopted. The motion carried.

6. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT:

ADMINISTRATION:

(1) Buttertubs Marsh Area - Advisory Committee on the Environment Recommendations to Council

At its meeting held Monday, 2000-JUN-26, Council referred the report from the Advisory Committee on the Environment respecting acquisition of lands for inclusion in Buttertubs Marsh for further comment from Staff.

The attached report concurred with the Environmental Committee that protection and preservation of these lands for environmental purposes has been identified by Council as a key community objective and that City ownership provides the highest level of protection. Whether or not the added protection, over and above existing regulatory protections, and relative to other community priorities is worth the cost to taxpayers, Staff is unable to say at this time. At the present time, the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission is undertaking a review of strategic properties in the Third Street area and Staffs' conclusion is that this review should include this wider issue.

Recommendation: That Council refer the report prepared by Mr. Merilees and the report of the Advisory Committee on the Environment to the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission for consideration as part of the planning study which is underway for the Third Street Corridor.

Moved by Councillor Holdom, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 20

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES:

CURRENT PLANNING:

(2) Development Permit No. DP000059 - 741 Third Street (Aquatic Centre)

On 2000-MAR-13, Council approved, in principle, a Development Permit for the aquatic centre. Council’s review included site planning, landscaping, external building design, and proposed variances.

At that time, the project’s lot boundaries had not been fixed. The final subdivision would fix the lot boundaries. Formal approval of the Development Permit was to be considered when the final subdivision has been completed by the Nanaimo School District.

The aquatic centre’s lot boundaries are now set. The final subdivision documents are being processed by the Nanaimo School District. Signatures and Land Title registration are imminent.

Council’s approval now is important so the construction schedule can proceed.

The proposed variances include the tower feature which is 18.2 metres (59.7 feet) in height above average finish grade. The maximum allowable height is 12 metres (39.37 feet). The required height variance is 6.2 metres (20.33 feet). The water slide tubes siting requires the rear yard setback to be reduced from 7.5 (24.6 feet) to 0 metre (0 feet).

The leisure wave pool building section siting requires the rear yard setback to be reduced from 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) to 7 metres (22.97 feet). The aquatic centre’s connection to the school requires the side yard to be reduced from 4 metres (13.12 feet) to 0 metre (0 feet).

A small portion of the aquatic centre and water slide tubes encroaches into the side yard and requires the side yard to be reduced to 2.5 metres (8.2 feet) and 1.25 metres (4.1 feet), respectively.

The aquatic centre’s lot configuration will accommodate 129 parking spaces. The City agreement allows access to abutting Nanaimo District Secondary School’s parking and the Serauxman Stadium parking. The total available on site parking is 508 parking spaces.

Recommendation: That Council authorize a Development Permit for the 52-metre Aquatic and Leisure Facility located at 741 Third Street.

Moved by Councillor Holdom, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 21

(3) Development Permit No. DP000085 - 435 Terminal Avenue North

At its meeting held 2000-JUN-26, Council received a Staff report recommending approval of a Development Permit for 435 Terminal Avenue. At the same meeting, Council also received a presentation from the owner and the tenant of the adjacent property who both expressed concerns about the proposed project and advised that, as proposed, the development would negatively impact their property and/or business.

Council declined to deal with the application and instead referred the application back to Staff for further consideration of the building siting and to try to facilitate a solution agreeable to both parties. A meeting was held several days later, at which time agreement was reached which included the following adjustments to the site plan:

• re-siting the building north on the property line a total of 1.17 metres (3.83 feet) from the Galloway Building (excluding aerial encroachments). • reducing the driveway aisle width from 5.49 metres (18 feet) to 4.88 metres (16 feet). • removing the tree from the southeast corner of the front property line.

The above adjustments to the site plan were made and submitted to the adjacent property owner for her review. The adjacent property owner subsequently provided a letter to the City advising that the revised siting would not be acceptable and expressing a number of additional concerns about the project and the City’s design guidelines in general. (A copy of this letter was appended to the report, as was a copy of a letter from the project architect setting out his client’s position that the project should be allowed to proceed).

At this point, Staff do not believe that a compromise is possible using the initial design as a starting point. Redesign of the project would be both expensive and time consuming. Accordingly, Council has two basic options to consider: 1. approve the project as presented or, 2. decline to approve the requested variances.

The project generally conforms to the General Development Permit Area Design Guidelines; however, as designed, it does require a number of variances.

The required parking for the retail use is 12 parking spaces. However, the site design can only accommodate 10 parking spaces. The proposed parking variance is 2 parking spaces.

The required front yard setback along Terminal Avenue is 10 metres (32.8 feet); however, to respond to design elements of the Modified Mainstreet to obtain improved street presence, the building has been sited 4.5 metres (14.76 feet) from the property line abutting Terminal Avenue. This siting has been set and approved by the Ministry of Transportation & Highways. The proposed variance is 5.5 metres (10.5 feet).

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 22

The site design was unable to accommodate a specified loading area; however, the applicant feels that the nature of retail business which could be accommodated in the proposed building is that deliveries will be infrequent and can be accommodated by the vehicle using the drive aisle in the parking area at the rear.

The project specifies a two-way driveway aisle that requires a width of 5.49 metres (18 feet). However, due to the re-siting of the building north on the property line a total of 1.17 metres (3.83 feet) from the Galloway Building, the driveway aisle needs to be reduced to 4.88 metres (16 feet).

The front property line abuts Terminal Avenue and requires a Level 1 landscape buffer. The buffer treatment will be limited as one of the required trees is to be removed from the southeast corner of the front property line to ensure maximum storefront visibility to the Galloway Building from Terminal Avenue.

The rear landscape buffer has been reduced from 1.8 metres (5.9 feet) to 1.58 metres (5.17 feet).

The Planning and Development Advisory Committee reviewed this application on 2000-MAY-04 and recommended that DP000085 be approved, as presented.

Staff believe that the siting of the building has been revised as much as is possible without a major redesign of the project.

Recommendation: That Council authorize a Development Permit for a commercial building at 435 Terminal Avenue North.

Moved by Councillor Rispin, seconded by Councillor Lance that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

(4) Development Variance Permit No. DVP00025 - 3851 Shenton Road (Steve Marshall Ford)

During the course of investigating a sign infraction on a neighbouring property, Staff recently became aware that several signs at 3851 Shenton Road have been erected without permit. A search of City permits revealed that there was no permit on record for two of three existing freestanding signs. Furthermore, the placement of these two signs contravenes the City's Sign Bylaw.

The Sign Bylaw states that “not more than one freestanding sign shall be permitted adjacent to each highway frontage of a site, and in no case shall more than three freestanding signs be permitted per site or shopping centre. Each sign shall be located adjacent to the allowing highway frontage.”

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 23

Although three freestanding signs are permitted on site, the City's sign bylaw requires that they be erected facing different highway frontages (ie within 50 feet of the road it faces). In the case of 3851 Shenton Road, all three signs front onto Shenton Road and the property only fronts two highways, Shenton Road and an unnamed road along its south west boundary. Therefore, the northern sign cannot be relocated to conform to the sign bylaw. The southern sign would conform to the sign bylaw if it were moved 22 feet so that it was located within fifty feet of the unnamed road.

The applicant advises that the sign bases and structures were in existence when Steve Marshall Ford commenced its operations in 1997 and that the signs were previously erected by the former owner. In order to rectify the illegal nature of the existing signage, Steve Marshall Ford has submitted a Development Variance Permit application to permit the two existing freestanding signs to remain. Should the applicant be successful in obtaining a development variance permit, a sign permit application for these signs will also be submitted.

The applicant has submitted the following rationale in support of the Development Variance Permit:

“The purpose of our request is to allow the two pre-existing signs located at the north and south side of our property to remain. Both of these signs were already in the places they currently reside when the business was purchased from Meyers Holland in March of 1997. Sign ‘A’ is within 22 feet of conforming to the bylaw. We are requesting that this sign be able to remain in it’s current location for two reasons. The first is that this area is already the lowest vertical point of the property, so moving the sign would only make it less visible from Shenton Road, and the second being the fact that moving it only 22 feet would incur substantial cost for limited changes.

Sign ‘B’ located on the North side of the property is at the corner of Jingle Pot and Shenton Road. This sign provides signage for Jingle Pot Road mainly and is situated on the high side of the property. Due to this fact this is the only sign that is really visible from the highway. Our main dealership sign ‘C’, which faces Shenton Road and conforms to the bylaw, is located in a large hollow so it is very difficult to see until one is quite close to the dealership. As stated earlier these signs have all been in place since our purchase of this dealership in 1997. We are not aware that there have been any complaints by anyone and we go to great lengths to make sure they are well maintained and not obtrusive to the property or our surrounding area. Further to all this, it would result in considerable cost to move or remove any of them.

As an active member of our community, Steve Marshall Ford is an outstanding corporate citizen. We employ over 75 people and continuously strive to grow so that we may make a positive impact on Nanaimo as well as the families we support. We take considerable pride in keeping our property professional, clean and neat and actually have received several compliments from some of our neighbours as to the ‘fantastic look’ of our property. We hope that all this will be taken into consideration.”

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 24

Accordingly, Staff seek Council’s direction on the variance application.

Recommendation: That Council indicate whether or not it is prepared to authorize Staff to commence the Development Variance Permit notification procedure to allow two additional (existing) freestanding signs on the Shenton Road frontage at the Steve Marshall Ford Lincoln Ltd. Automobile dealership.

Moved by Councillor Holdom, seconded by Councillor Lance that the report be received and Council indicate that it is not prepared to authorize Staff to commence the Development Variance Permit notification procedure to allow two additional (existing) freestanding signs on the Shenton Road frontage at the Steve Marshall Ford Lincoln Ltd. Automobile dealership. The motion carried.

(5) Rezoning Application No. RA000016 - 1865 Bowen Road

The subject application was received on 1998-MAR-13 from Chatwin Engineering Ltd., on behalf of Hampton Investments Ltd. The purpose of the application was to rezone a portion of the subject property from Light Industrial (I-2) to Community Shopping Town Centre (C-7).

At the Regular Meeting of Council held 1998-JUN-22, Council gave Third Reading to "ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT BYLAW 1998 NO. 4000.228". As a condition of final approval, Council directed that:

1. the future extension of Boxwood Road and Dufferin Crescent through the subject property be dedicated; and 2. that a covenant be registered securing landscaping within the future Dufferin Crescent.

Since Third Reading, Staff have requested numerous times that the applicant proceed with the registration of the required documents. Given the considerable period of time with no activity on this file, Staff now recommend that the file be closed and the associated bylaw abandoned.

Recommendation: That Council consider abandoning "ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT BYLAW 1998 NO. 4000.228".

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor Rispin that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

STRATEGIC PLANNING:

(6) Official Community Plan Amendments - Review Period May - November 2000

The Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee met in June to review the four external applications and Staff initiated amendments to the Official Community Plan. Recommendations on these applications have been submitted to Council and were part of the agenda.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 25

While Staff supported most of the consensus and majority recommendations in the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee report, Staff do not support the application to redesignate the property at 2421, 2425 and 2429 Bowen Road from Neighbourhood to a designation which would allow commercial development on that property. This application is not significantly different from the application in the previous OCP review period for this site, which Council recently turned down.

Multi-family development can provide a buffer between Bowen Road and the adjacent neighbourhood. This particular site is well served by nearby commercial uses and community facilities, and therefore, is an appropriate infill multi-family site for the future as infill properties become more and more scarce over time.

Recommendations: That Council:

1. not approve the application to redesignate the property at 2421, 2425 and 2429 Bowen Road from Neighbourhood to a designation which would allow a commercial land use; and

2. accept all other Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee (PNAC) consensus recommendations and majority recommendations as outlined in the Plan Nanaimo Advisory Committee report on this agenda.

Mr. G. D. Berry, City Manager advised that this item had been dealt with earlier in the agenda under Item (1) of Reports of Societies, Boards, Commissions and Committees.

BUILDING INSPECTION:

(7) Unresolved Building Deficiencies/Illegal Suites

The following properties have unresolved building deficiencies in contravention of "BUILDING BYLAW 1988 NO. 3220" and "ZONING BYLAW 1993 NO. 4000":

(a) Street Address: 2715 - 105th Street Property Owner: Sharon A. Coburn Owner's Address: 2715 - 105th Street, Nanaimo, B.C. V9T 3X7 Building Deficiency: Illegal Suite

(b) Street Address: 2318 Pheasant Terrace Property Owner: Lynn S. Brewster Owner's Address: 2318 Pheasant Terrace, Nanaimo, B.C. V9T 3P4 Building Deficiency: Illegal Suite

Recommendation: That Council, by resolution, instruct the City Clerk to file a notice respecting the above properties in the Land Title Office under Section 700 of the Municipal Act.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 26

Mayor Korpan inquired if there was anyone in attendance who wished to speak to the reports pertaining to Unresolved Building Deficiencies/Illegal Suites.

No one in attendance wished to make representation with respect to these matters.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor Holdom that the reports be received and the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

BYLAW SERVICES:

(8) Unsightly Premises

Reports were attached regarding unsightly premises at the following locations:

(a) 275 Nicol Street Owner: Akal Development Ltd. 4321 Gulfview Drive Nanaimo, B.C. V9T 6K4

(b) 822 Farquhar Street Owner: Jaspal S. Saroya 690 Albert Street Nanaimo, B.C. V9R 2W4

(c) 627 Milton Street Owner: Akal Development Ltd. 690 Albert Street Nanaimo, B.C. V9R 2W4

(d) 364 Bruce Avenue Owner: David P. Foster Deana S. Foster 364 Bruce Avenue Nanaimo, B.C. V9R 3Y1

(e) 1648 Caspers Way Owner: Kenneth R. McLeod Norma L. McLeod 1648 Caspers Way Nanaimo, B.C. V9S 1K1

(f) 3504 Wiltshire Drive Owner: Bryon W. Chomey 1415 Child Avenue NE Calgary, AB T2E 5E3

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 27

(g) 5373 Westhaven Place Owner: Susanne Voetmann c/o 2-3188 Barons Road Nanaimo, B.C. V9T 4B5

(h) 5520 Godfrey Road Owner: Kathryn S. Chappell 5975 Jaynes Road Duncan, B.C. V9L 3C4

(i) 3280 Crystal Place Owner: FL400 Ventures Ltd. 420 - 880 Douglas Street Victoria, B.C. V8W 2B7

Recommendation: That Council, pursuant to "PROPERTY MAINTENANCE BYLAW 1990 NO. 3704" and amendments thereto, direct the owners of the above properties to remove from the premises those items as set out in the resolutions within fourteen (14) days, or the work will be undertaken by the City's agents at the owner's cost.

Mr. G. D. Berry, City Manager, advised that Item (i) - 3280 Crystal Place had been rectified prior to the meeting.

Mayor Korpan inquired if there was anyone in attendance who wished to speak to the report pertaining to Unsightly Premises.

No one in attendance wished to make representation with respect to these matters.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the reports be received and the recommendation be adopted for Items (a) to (h). The motion carried.

(9) Nuisance Properties

Reports were attached regarding nuisance properties at the following locations:

(a) 515 Milton Street Owner: Akal Development Ltd. 690 Albert Street Nanaimo, B.C. V9R 2W4

(b) 951 Haliburton Street Owner: Glenn Struss Ken Struss c/o 810 - 602 - 12th Ave. S.W. (Cancorp) Calgary, AB T2R 1J3

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 28

Recommendation: That Council, by resolution, pursuant to Section 727 of the Municipal Act, direct the owners to secure the buildings to City of Nanaimo standards within thirty (30) days, and that any cost incurred by the Municipality be recovered pursuant to the Municipal Act.

Mr. G. D. Berry, City Manager advised that Item (a) - 515 Milton Street had been rectified prior to the meeting.

Mayor Korpan inquired if there was anyone in attendance who wished to speak to the reports pertaining to Nuisance Properties.

No one in attendance wished to make representation with respect to this matter.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted for Item (b). The motion carried.

CORPORATE SERVICES:

CITY CLERK:

(10) Request for Letter of No Objection - Howard Johnson Harbourside Hotel

The City has received correspondence from Mr. Dan Brady, General Manager, Howard Johnson Harbourside Hotel, requesting a Letter of No Objection from the City in his application to the Provincial Liquor Control and Licensing Branch for an amendment to his Class "A" License to extend the hours of opening of The Grizzly Bar, from Sunday at Noon to Midnight, to Sunday at Noon to 2:00 a.m. Monday.

As Council is aware, a Letter of No Objection from the City is required before the Province will consider the application further.

Staff have distributed this correspondence to various City departments enquiring whether or not they would have any objection to this application. Attached were replies from the Bylaw Enforcement Division, Business Licence Division, Department of Strategic Planning, Department of Development Services and the R.C.M.P., indicating they would have no concerns with this proposal. A copy of the correspondence was also sent to the Nanaimo City Centre Association, but no reply has been received.

As per Council's policy, this report was placed on this agenda for the Council Meeting held 2000-JUL-10 for information only. It was placed on the agenda for Council's consideration.

Recommendation: That Council indicate whether or not it has any objection to the application by Mr. Dan Brady, General Manager, Howard Johnson Harbourside Hotel, requesting a Letter of No Objection from the City in his application to the Provincial Liquor Control and Licensing Branch for an amendment to his Class "A" License to extend the hours of opening of The Grizzly Bar, from Sunday at Noon to Midnight, to Sunday at Noon to 2:00 a.m. Monday. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 29

Moved by Councillor Rispin, seconded by Councillor Lance that the report be received and Council indicate that it has no objection to the application by Mr. Dan Brady, General Manager, Howard Johnson Harbourside Hotel, requesting a Letter of No Objection from the City in his application to the Provincial Liquor Control and Licensing Branch for an amendment to his Class "A" License to extend the hours of opening of The Grizzly Bar, from Sunday at Noon to Midnight, to Sunday at Noon to 2:00 a.m. Monday. The motion carried.

FINANCE:

(11) Water/Sewer User Fee Subsidies

Council extends user fee subsidies for water and sewer rates to senior citizens who own their own home and who meet age and income limits. After a review of the qualifications and as a result of higher social assistance payments, Staff recommend that the income limits be increased. The limits were last increased in May 2000; however, since then social assistance payments were increased again.

Council is permitted by legislation to waive water or sewer rates to property owned and occupied by citizens 65 years of age or older and has, in the past, allowed a subsidy in the amount of 50 percent of water and sewer charges on owner occupied residences. The qualification income limits to receive these subsidies is set at 10 percent above basic income assistance levels provided to seniors by government.

To follow Council’s past policy, the existing limits need to be revised upwards.

Current Proposed Single owner occupier - per month $1,070 $1,080 - per annum $12,840 $12,960

Couples/household owner occupier - per month - per annum $1,780 $1,790 $21,360 $21,480

Recommendation: That Council consider giving first three readings to “USER FEE SUBSIDY BYLAW 2000 NO. 5463”.

Moved by Councillor Rispin, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

(12) Development Cost Charge Bylaws

Council’s policy is to review its Development Cost Charge (DCC) Bylaws every three years. Since the existing bylaws were implemented in 1997, the Bylaws are up for review.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 30

A lengthy review process has been undertaken. This review has included several meetings with the DCC Stakeholders Committee to discuss impacts on the development industry and a complete technical review.

DCCs are based on the “user pay” principle. Where costs of infrastructure can be reasonably attributed to development, they become part of the DCC calculation and are paid as part of the development approval process. Because infrastructure costs are high (i.e. sewer, water, storm drainage, roads, open space) there is no question that DCCs have become a significant element in the cost structure for most developments. Because of this, there is a strong belief on the part of most development industry stakeholders that DCCs should be decreased – particularly for residential development. (Note: Commercial and Industrial DCCs were substantially reduced in 1997, and development industry representatives believe this is one of the important reasons for the strength in this sector of development since 1997.)

There are two main options for decreasing DCCs:

1. Reduce the number and cost of DCC construction projects. 2. Increase the “Assist” Factor paid from general revenue (i.e. taxpayer contribution).

Reducing the number and cost of DCC projects has been rejected by Staff because it could actually have the opposite effect; i.e. hurt development even more. This is because the projects still have to be constructed for the developments to proceed and there is no funding being set aside to pay for them.

Increasing the Assist Factor is a political option for Council, but must be accompanied with the appropriate level of alternate funding.

The DCC Stakeholders Committee, in addition to wishing to see DCCs reduced generally, also expressed a strong interest in a specific reduction in the downtown as a means to encourage redevelopment and revitalization. This would be an additional reduction to the DCC “netting” that already occurs downtown when a new building replaces an old one (i.e. DCCs are only calculated on the increase in area - not on the entire new building).

The following options were presented in the report:

1. Base: Included are all projects required to accommodate growth. Keeps all other factors consistent with 1997 Bylaws. Residential DCCs increase by $2,401. (This option reinstates such projects as four-laning the remainder of Bowen Road, which was deleted in 1997.)

2. Remove some road projects: Four-laning of the remainder of Bowen Road (approximately $10 Million) has been eliminated from the project list. Residential DCCs are still $1,470 higher than 1997.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 31

3. Remove road projects and removal of all projects in downtown: Residential DCCs are still $680 higher than in 1997 in the remainder of the City, but are zero downtown (including the “Bowl” area).

4. Increase the Assist Factor to 10 percent (from 1 percent) and eliminate the same road projects: Residential DCCs still $230 higher than 1997.

5. Increase Assist Factor to 10 percent, eliminate same road projects, and assign a 50 percent “benefiting factor” to all DCC projects in the downtown: This reduces Residential DCCs by $470 in all but the downtown and reduces multi-family DCCs by approximately half in the downtown.

6. The same as Option No. 5 but assigning an 85 percent “benefiting factor” to all DCC projects in the downtown. This reduces Multi-Family DCCs by approximately 85 percent in the downtown. The Single Family Residential reduction in the rest of the City remains at $470.

Of the options presented, the Stakeholders Group supports Option No. 6. Further options exist to increase the Assist Factor by any amount desired and the Stakeholders can be expected to support any additional “assist”.

All options that reduce DCCs by increasing the Assist Factor, increasing the benefiting factor, or deleting projects in the downtown have a cost to the general community in that the projects will still have to proceed at some point. The lower the DCCs, the higher the costs to be borne by the general community taxpayer.

The additional general community taxpayer costs for each option are as follows:

Option Additional Annual Cost for General Community Taxpayer

1 0 2 0 (unless Council proceeds to build Bowen Road) 3 $650,000 4 $235,000 5 $350,000 6 $470,000

Staff support the initiative to encourage redevelopment of the downtown through reducing DCCs in the downtown. Even though Staff believe that such an initiative alone will not be enough to cause immediate change downtown, it will send a further message that the City is encouraging change. A benefiting factor for downtown services is philosophically supported by Staff since a valid argument can be made that renewal of services in the downtown should not be the sole responsibility of new development, i.e. the benefit also accrues to the existing City residents. Staff also believe a modest increase in the general Assist Factor is warranted throughout the City so that a decrease in residential rates can be achieved. The development community representatives admit that even with no DCCs, the last few years would have been a very difficult residential market. Even so, Staff believe the City needs to take steps to ensure a strong economically viable residential development COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 32

industry continues to exist in Nanaimo. A modest decrease in Residential DCCs sends the message the City is taking steps to reverse the escalation in building costs while protecting the long-term ability to continue to support development. This incentive for development needs to be balanced with a cost for the general taxpayer that is fair and reasonable. Options for funding the community taxpayer share includes general taxation or the allocation of as yet unallocated Casino funds (unallocated Casino funds estimated at approximately $1.0 Million per year). A decrease or lowering of DCCs may, however, cause concern from developments that have previously paid DCCs at the higher rates. Under the current legislation, Council cannot refund DCCs even if it believes a refund of the “overpayment” is warranted.

Recommendation: That Council receive the report for information at this time. The report, along with the appropriate bylaws will be placed on the agenda of the Regular Meeting of Council scheduled for 2000-SEP-11. This will allow ample opportunity for community comment.

Moved by Councillor McNabb, seconded by Councillor Rispin that the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

COMMUNITY SERVICES:

PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE:

(13) Oliver Road Secondary School/Community Centre Joint Project

School District No. 68 (Nanaimo/Ladysmith) has an agreement to purchase 27 acres adjacent to the 7.5 acre City property on Oliver Road so that a joint secondary school/community centre project can be initiated. The purchase is conditional on the School District receiving and approving to its sole satisfaction by 2000-AUG-07 several items, including a Joint Use Agreement with the City of Nanaimo for the development of a secondary school and a community recreation facility on the land.

At their meeting held 2000-JUL-26, the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission passed a motion to, “table the endorsement of the Joint Operating Agreement until the 2000-OCT-25 meeting”. However, based on existing Council direction, Staff believe that timely endorsement of the Joint Operating Agreement by Council is required. This does not preclude the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission from further input or review of the Joint Operating Agreement as the design and construction process proceeds.

The Joint Operating Agreement is meant to be a guideline for the operation of this community facility that includes a secondary school and a community centre. The spirit of the agreement is to maximize use for the benefit of both the public school students attending this facility and the community. The agreement is expected to evolve over time so that the operation will best meet community needs.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 33

The Joint Operating Agreement requires the endorsement of the City of Nanaimo and School District No. 68 to complete the purchase. Some sections are still being developed. The Joint Operating Agreement will be reviewed by the City Solicitor before its final approval. A Joint Union / Management Committee has been organized to develop a Memorandum of Agreement that will address operational and cross-jurisdictional opportunities related to employee assignment.

By way of this process, Council is committing to the further development and ongoing maintenance of a Joint Operating Agreement with School District No. 68 for the Oliver Road Secondary School/Community Centre.

Recommendation: That Council endorse the Joint Operating Agreement between the City of Nanaimo and School District No. 68 for the Oliver Road Secondary School/Community Centre Joint Project as attached to the report.

Moved by Councillor Holdom, seconded by Councillor Cantelon that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted.

Councillor Sherry requested a recorded vote.

IN FAVOUR OPPOSED Mayor Korpan Councillor McNabb Councillor Cantelon Councillor Sherry Councillor Holdom Councillor Lance Councillor Rispin

The motion carried.

ENGINEERING/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT:

(14) Fitzwilliam/Milton Street Intersection Upgrading

The following five tenders were received by the City Clerk on Tuesday, 2000-JUL-25 and opened in the Board Room:

Knappett Industries Ltd. $472,250.92 Fournier Excavating Ltd. $490,392.02 Hub Excavating Ltd. $528,580.00 Sound Contracting Ltd. $593,809.73 Chikangas Enterprises $635,291.15

[Note: This contract does not include the widening of the road at Milton and Hecate Streets where the rock bluff exists.]

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 34

Recommendation: That Council award the City contract for the Fitzwilliam/Milton Street Intersection Upgrading to low tenderer Knappett Industries Ltd. for the low bid of $472,250.92.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the report be received and the recommendation be adopted. The motion carried.

7. CITY MANAGER’S SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT:

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES:

CURRENT PLANNING:

(1) Development Variance Permit No. DVP000024 - 850 Jackson Road

A Development Variance Permit application has been received from New Concrete Concepts Inc., on behalf of Duke Point Development Ltd., to vary the height of two concrete silos to be located in the Duke Point Heavy Industrial Zone from 18 metres (59.06 feet) to 44.2 metres (145.01 feet).

While the proposed height of the concrete silos is 26.2 metres (85.96 feet) above what is permitted in an I-4 Zone, the additional height is required to accommodate the new industrial technology proposed for the site.

The Zoning Bylaw requires that the site be paved and one parking space be provided. However, as the business is in early stage of development, the applicant has proposed to erect a sign indicating that an area of the site would be reserved for parking.

Staff supports the Development Variance Permit as the site is located in an I-4 Zone, there is a need to accommodate new industrial technology, and the Official Community Plan stresses the importance of preserving a base within the community to allow for a broad range of industrial activity.

Recommendation: That Council indicate whether or not it is prepared to authorize Staff to commence the Development Variance Permit notification procedure for this application.

Moved by Councillor McNabb, seconded by Councillor Cantelon that the report be received and Council indicated that it is prepared to authorize Staff to commence the Development Variance Permit notification procedure for this application. The motion carried.

8. RECEIVING OF INFORMATION ONLY REPORTS:

(a) Report from Mr. B. E. Clemens, Acting Director of Finance, re: New Business Licence Applications in 2000.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 35

(b) Report from Ms. S. A. Fry, Deputy City Collector, re: Assessment Roll Adjustments.

(c) Report from Mr. J. T. Bowden, City Clerk, re: Request for Letter of No Objection - The Commercial Hotel.

(d) Report from Mr. J. T. Bowden, City Clerk, re: Request for Letter of No Objection - The Press Room.

(e) Report from Mr. J. T. Bowden, City Clerk, re: Request for Letter of No Objection - Royal Canadian Legion No. 10.

(f) Report from Ms. Sharon J. Hvozdanski, Community Development Planner, re: Rocky Point/Hammond Bay/Stephenson Point Neighbourhood Plan New Steering Committee Members.

(g) Report from Ms. Harriet Rueggeberg, Environmental Planner, re: Review of Draft Steep Slope Development Guidelines.

(h) Report from Mr. P. N. Murphy, Manager, Property Services, re: Proposed Acquisition of British Columbia Assets and Land Corporation Properties at 850 Addison Road, 1651 Jingle Pot Road, 750 Third Street, 581/589/595 Terminal Avenue and 4020 Norwell Drive.

(i) Minutes of the Nanaimo Athletic Commission Meeting held Tuesday, 2000-JUL-04, at 3:00 p.m.

(j) Minutes of the Meeting of the Planning and Development Advisory Committee Held on Thursday, 2000-JUN-22, at 5:00 p.m.

(k) Minutes of the Nanaimo Community Heritage Commission Meeting held Wednesday, 2000-JUN-07, at 5:00 p.m.

(l) Minutes of the Sixth Regular Meeting of the City of Nanaimo Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission, held Wednesday 2000-JUL-26. (Supplemental)

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the Information Only Reports be received. The motion carried.

9. RECONSIDERATION OF BYLAWS:

(a) “ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT BYLAW 1998 NO. 4000.228” (RA 000016 - (RA.98-10) - to rezone property at 1865 Bowen Road from Light Industrial (I-2) to Community Shopping Centre Commercial (C-7) to permit future commercial development.)

Moved by Councillor Holdom, seconded by Councillor Sherry that “ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT BYLAW 1998 NO. 4000.228” be abandoned at third reading. The motion carried.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 36

10. INTRODUCTION OF BYLAWS:

(a) "USER FEE SUBSIDY BYLAW 2000 NO. 5463" (To provide for user fee subsidies in the City.)

Moved by Councillor Holdom, seconded by Councillor McNabb that "USER FEE SUBSIDY BYLAW 2000 NO. 5463" be given first, second and third reading. The motion carried.

11. GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE REQUESTING CONSIDERATION/ACTION:

(a) E-mail dated 2000-JUL-21, from Mr. Julian P. Benedict, Political Coordinator, POWER (Pets of B. C. Residents), No. 1401-1498 Harwood Street, Vancouver, requesting Council's written support for a Private Member's Bill recently introduced in Victoria, which would allow responsible pet owners much needed access to rental housing.

(b) Letter dated 2000-JUL-21, from Mr. Bruce Avis, President, Nanaimo Golf Club, requesting that Council reconsider its motion to increase the taxes paid by the Nanaimo Golf Club.

(c) Letter dated 2000-JUL-24, from Mr. Paul Manhas, Meena Holdings Ltd, DBA Palace Hotel, Nanaimo, requesting that his application for an occupancy permit for a patio built behind the Palace Hotel be approved, and requesting permission to install a hot tub on the patio for private use.

(d) Letter dated 2000-JUL-25, from Mr. Jonathan Berry, 346 Milton Street, urging Council to place a moratorium on road construction in the Old City, in particular, along Milton Street.

(e) Letter dated July 2000, from Ms. Janette Briere, 368 Haliburton Street, Nanaimo, requesting that the traffic problems in the Old City area be resolved without the blasting of Hecate Rock taking place and that the landmark Garry Oak at the top of the hill be preserved.

(f) Letter dated July 2000, from Mr. Jim Erkiletian, 368 Haliburton Street, Nanaimo, suggesting that public input be taken into consideration when traffic patterns in the Old City area are in the planning process.

(g) Letter dated 2000-JUL-26, from Mr. Fred Taylor, 204 Emery Way, Nanaimo, requesting that Council consider taking part in Canada Post's 'bulk mailing' program' which he calculates would reduce the City's mailing costs by one-third or approximately $10,000. per annum.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that Correspondence Items (a) to (g) be received. The motion carried.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 37

Item (b):

Moved by Councillor Rispin, seconded by Councillor McNabb that Staff be directed to set up a meeting with the existing Council and the Nanaimo Golf Club to reconsider the decision made. The motion carried.

Item (c):

Moved by Councillor McNabb, seconded by Councillor Cantelon that Staff be directed to issue an Occupancy Permit for the patio built behind the Palace Hotel and to allow the installation of a hot tub on the patio for private use. The motion carried.

12. GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE FOR INFORMATION ONLY:

(a) Letter dated 2000-JUL-25, from Ms. Moira Jenkins, Chair, Economic Development Group's (EDG) Business Response Team, regarding concerns with respect to the implications of Council's recent decision to restrict operating hours at 7-Eleven Convenience Stores.

(b) Letter dated 2000-JUL-25, from Mr. Vito Traversa, 414406 B.C. Ltd., regarding his opposition to "ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT BYLAW 1997 NO. 4000.178", which impedes his ability to rent or lease space on his commercial property at 1981 Wilfert Road to prospective tenants.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that Correspondence Items (a) and (b) be received. The motion carried.

13. ANY OTHER COMPETENT BUSINESS:

(a) St. John Ambulance Training Centre - Motion Proposed by Councillor Cantelon

"That Council support the lease of City-owned land at 2250 Labieux Road for use as a St. John Ambulance Training Centre, subject to appropriate rezoning, at an annual lease cost of $1.00."

(Note: This property is located next to the SPCA Animal Shelter. The land is currently zoned I-3, which does not permit the proposed training centre. A rezoning to I-2 is required. No OCP amendment is necessary.)

Mr. G. D. Berry, City Manager advised that this item had been dealt with earlier in the agenda.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 38

14. DELEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA:

(a) Ms. Jacqueline Wareham, 109 Milton Street, Nanaimo, regarding maintaining the integrity of cultural landscape in the Old City Neighbourhood.

Ms. Wareham made her presentation at the beginning of the agenda.

(b) Mr. Larry Whaley, President, Council of Canadians Mid-Island Chapter, 5234 Sherbourne Drive, Nanaimo, regarding tolerance and acceptance of others.

Mr. Whaley was previously authorized to address Council.

Mr. Whaley stated that:

- he would like to say that intolerance is intolerable, however that would be intolerable. - he simply wants to make it clear that it is the view of the Mid-Island Chapter of the Council of Canadians that the action of those members of Council who left the Chamber during the time of the discussion and vote on the proclamation for Pride Day is damaging to our community, is intolerant and sets a tone in the community which could lead to circumstances that all of us do not want to see. - he related an incident from his youth regarding sexual differences and discrimination, and expressed concern that the same attitude of intolerance shown by Council on this issue will continue if it is allowed. - he knows that not all members of the Council of Canadians agree with their position that there should be tolerance on this and other issues. - he distributed a copy of the Council of Canadians' Statement of Purpose and Guiding Principles. - he cited from the last item on the sheet: "we do not tolerate racism or discrimination of any kind. We believe in the uniqueness, equality and potential of each culture, race and gender. Accordingly, we see, to include Canadians who share the Organization's values. No one shall be refused membership or otherwise subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age or ability. - that's the kind of tolerant attitude that he would like his City to have. - he requested that those members of Council that took part in the discussion and that vote would apologize and try to erase some of that damage that they have done.

Moved by Councillor Cantelon, seconded by Councillor Lance that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(c) Mr. Pat Barron, 246 King Road, Nanaimo, regarding a "Gay Pride" Proclamation.

Mr. Barron was previously authorized to address Council.

Mr. Barron stated that:

- he extended his thanks and appreciation to the Mayor and Councillors Sherry, McNabb, Rispin and Lance for their publicly-expressed reservations regarding the attempted publicity for their "cause" by Rainbow BC. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 39

- in his opinion, they expressed the deep-seated rejection of the majority of Canadians of practices which they do not accept. - the same attempts by Rainbow BC have been made in Kamloops, Kelowna, Fort St. John and other communities. - he quoted from a newspaper article in the Alaska Highway News in Fort St. John on Tuesday, 2000-JUL-25 for the reversal of their Council's decision regarding the Gay Pride Day proclamation. - he has been a member of the Council of Canadians for several years, and stated that Mr. Whaley's comments in the previous delegation are not on Mr. Barron's behalf. - he feels that this is "dangerous rubbish for the future of our Canadian way of life. - in the English Dictionary "democracy" is defined as: - a "state in which all citizens have equal political rights", and - "government in which the supreme power is retained by the people". - it is his belief that if there are any further threats from any group or body, and which in his view are blackmail, that the entire matter be put to Referendum by all voters in our community and put an end to this nonsense for all time.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(d) Mr. Gregory H. Parker, c/o 15-485 Sixth Street, Nanaimo requesting that the bylaw which regulates the type of merchandise being sold by pushcarts on City property be amended.

Mr. Parker was previously authorized to address Council.

Mr. Parker stated that:

- he has been a citizen of this wonderful City for many years and for most of that time he has been wanting to open a small business in town. - however, the cost of opening any business, especially a storefront, is both financially and labour intensive. - unfortunately, because of circumstances beyond their control, and the fact that they are handicapped, welfare recipients, this dream could not be realized. - that was until recently when they were inspired to try and create a business on an extremely small scale using a 2½ by 4 foot push cart. - you could not believe their shock, disbelief and anger, after designing and building their cart and putting their equipment together on it, when they went to City Hall to licence it they found that the bylaws regarding push carts on City property were limited to only food, beverages and flowers. - he feels these limitations are the worst kind of discrimination because they target and/or limit those on the lowest end of the big business spectrum, most of which are the same as himself - on the lowest end of the financial spectrum. - the business that they wish to launch involves photography and digital imaging which can be put directly onto disc, and can be used in the customer's home computer or printed on posters, post cards and pictures, right there on the spot. - this would be a great opportunity for Nanaimo to promote itself and the beautiful scenery found within. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 40

- the problem is that they can't do that, except on the case of private property because of the City's arbitrary, antiquated and, they believe draconian laws regarding push carts. - the cart they have designed is as unique as the business they have designed. - the products, although they are not unique, would be done in a fairly unique way - instantaneously and on the spot. - they believe that there is no business like this anywhere in Canada or anywhere else around the world. - how logical and legitimate can this bylaw regarding push carts in Nanaimo be when it is legal to sell food - which could potentially kill you, but it is not legal to sell a picture of food; when it is legal to sell a beverage or a flower, but not a picture of them. - these bylaws need to be updated and brought into the 21st Century so he can get his own business up and running. - also for the other entrepreneurs, who, like himself, want to take a giant leap and go into business. - he noticed that food and drink are illegal in the Council Chamber, but not photography, which is just the opposite of what he is needing. - he has been promoting Nanaimo for years; some of his T-shirts have been all over the world, and he knows he can do well in promoting this City. - his cart is almost identical to the blue one at Swy-a-lana Lagoon where you can buy hot dogs, or shaved ice, but you can't go down and buy a picture of Black Frank's statue. - he requested that Council change the laws as he has a lot on the line.

Moved by Councillor Cantelon, seconded by Councillor Sherry that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor Cantelon that this issue be referred to Staff for a report in conjunction with the Nanaimo City Centre Association. The motion carried.

(e) Mr. Jonathan Berry, 346 Milton Street, Nanaimo, regarding the removal of a rock bluff and damage to a tree at Milton and Hecate Streets.

Mr. Berry was previously authorized to address Council.

Mr. Berry stated that:

- five minutes can seem like an eternity if you have enough dynamite. - Hecate rock is under threat of being blown up through road widening and he wished to express his thoughts. - there is a high percentage of pedestrians in this neighbourhood, who feel that the speed of the traffic along Milton Street is dangerously high. - slow traffic is safe traffic; it is no secret that speed kills. - the proposed widening of Milton Street at Hecate will allow the traffic a mistaken confidence to drive faster along this stretch of road, and there is no plan for a pedestrian crosswalk at this corner, in spite of the senior's lodge on Hecate Street and the zoning for medium density housing. COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 41

- many people live in this area because they have chosen a car-free lifestyle and are content to walk or cycle to their destinations, as encouraged by our Official Community Plan. - he feels widening Milton Street without lowering the hump in the road actually makes crossing Milton Street more dangerous for pedestrians. - one of the reasons put forward for widening Milton Street was to provide space for bicycles; however the Greater Nanaimo Cycling Coalition has told him that they are not in favour of widening Milton Street as they feel this will tend to lead to increased motor vehicle speeds, which will in turn make the street less attractive to cyclists, and will increase the damage done in the case of accidents - the Cycling Coalition feels that in some cases, the widening of roads makes a street more attractive to motorists. - another very important consideration in the City's plans is the irrevocable loss of the rock face at the corner of Milton and Hecate Streets. - existing in its current state for some 75 years, it is home to a host of natural plants and trees, including the endangered species - the Garry Oak tree, here found near the northern border of its habitat. - it is pertinent to note that the main factor causing the endangerment of this species is loss of habitat due to development. - the rock is an integral part of the landscape of the neighbourhood and many, many residents feel it is a unique and beautiful feature to which they are esthetically and emotionally attached. - people feel it improves the neighbourhood. - it has been suggested that the City bring in more rock to make a rock garden on Milton Street, opposite the present rock, and feature it as an attraction on our City's website. - he has the Spaxman "Concept for Downtown Nanaimo" report from 1993, which mentions rock outcrops and states that "many of the original features of Nanaimo have been altered by mining development and infilling of the tidal inlet and part of the harbour; those that remain merit serious consideration and wherever possible, preservation and/or enhancement should be a priority." - when you drive by you are unable to appreciate the beauty of the land here. - he circulated photos and extended an invitation to all members of Council to go down to the rock, get out of their cars and have a really good look at what is about to be destroyed. - this is a beautiful rock and it has been nominated to go on the heritage inventory.

Moved by Councillor McNabb, seconded by Councillor Sherry that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

(f) Ms. Charlene Ball, 1469 Edwin Road, Qualicum Beach, on behalf of Ms. Alison Donaghey, requesting that Council waive the $1,000. fine for her dog that was impounded by the Nanaimo Animal Shelter.

Ms. Ball was previously authorized to address Council.

COUNCIL 2000-JUL-31 PAGE 42

Ms. Ball stated that:

- she and her husband were the breeders of this dog. - this dog (Lu) had an incident of getting out last Thursday by unknown measures, and made a superficial wound on another dog on her jaunt, possibly back to her prior home. - this is a good dog; she is a show dog and has never had a prior pound conviction of this nature. - for those who are not familiar, show dogs are very tightly secured in a fenced yard. - her neighbour is concerned as well because her gates have also been opened more than twice within a year and her animals have escaped. - Lu is basically a quiet, household dog, and if you didn't know it, you wouldn't think there was a dog living there. - she has a letter from the person whose dog had been injured stating that he is pleased with the response that he received from Ms. Donaghey in locating the vet that his dog had been taken to and finding out the damages that occurred to the dog, as well as paying all the veterinary expenses. - Ms. Donaghey is a recent young widow and single mother who has her own business and works very hard, and she requested, on her behalf, that the impoundment of $1,000. be waived. - Ms. Donaghey's son Anthony circulated photographs of Lu assisting in the bringing up of a litter of kittens, etc. - this dog has no known record at dog shows of any incident of this nature.

Moved by Councillor Rispin, seconded by Councillor Sherry that the presentation be received. The motion carried.

15. ADJOURNMENT:

Moved by Councillor Sherry, seconded by Councillor McNabb at 9:35 p.m. that the meeting terminate, with the next Meeting of Council to be held Monday, 2000-AUG-14, commencing at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, City Hall. The motion carried.

______M A Y O R

CERTIFIED CORRECT:

______CITY CLERK