ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

Transcription

1 Minutes for the 7:00 p.m. Thursday, September 9, 2010, Town of Qualicum Beach Special Council Meeting held in the Qualicum Beach Civic Centre, 747 Jones Street, Qualicum Beach, BC PRESENT: Council: Mayor Teunis Westbroek Councillor Barry Avis Councillor Kent Becker Councillor Mary Brouilette Councillor Jack Wilson ALSO PRESENT: Staff: Mark Brown, Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) Bob Weir, Director of Engineering & Utilities Paul Butler, Director of Planning Luke Sales, Deputy Director of Planning Trudy Coates, Corporate Administrator Heather Svensen, Deputy Corporate Administrator The Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA Council adopted by unanimous consent, the September 9, 2010 Special Council meeting agenda. PUBLIC HEARING Town of Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 590, 2005, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 and Town of Qualicum Beach Land Use and Subdivision Bylaw No. 580, 1999, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 At 7:00 p.m. the Mayor declared open the Public Hearing, convened pursuant to section 890 of the Local Government Act, to allow the public to make representations to Council respecting matters contained in the proposed bylaws that would change the zoning, land use and OCP designation of 431 College Road, also known as the College Inn. The Mayor reviewed the purpose of the hearing, and procedures to follow during the hearing, noting submissions already received (Steve Anderson, Paul Kyba, Jill Oakes, Sam Coval and Ainsley Foster) were included in the agenda and are available with other records in the binder at the entrance. The Director of Planning introduced Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 590, 2005, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 and Land Use and Subdivision Bylaw No. 580, 1999, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 which, if adopted, would: Bylaw o Amend Bylaw No. 590 in Schedule 2.1 Land Use by changing the designation from Commercial to Multiple Family Residential ; Bylaw No o Amend Bylaw No. 580 in Schedule 6A Zoning Map by changing the zoning designation from Commercial 2 Zone (C2) to Residential 15 Zone (R15); o Amend Bylaw No. 580 by adding section Residential 15 Zone (R15) which lists the permitted uses (residential use only except for Public Assembly on the ground floor of the heritage building), minimum site area, maximum number and size of buildings and structures, minimum setback requirements, and conditions for: Contribution to the Town s Affordable Housing Reserve Construction of a beach access trail and stairs Restoration and retention of the Qualicum College heritage building

2 Page 2 of 12 Architect s certification that design and construction of all buildings meets or exceeds the North Vancouver Adaptable Design Guidelines Level 2; and the design and construction meets or exceeds an equivalency to the Certified LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standard. The Director of Planning highlighted changes from the bylaw and plans presented at the last public hearing. The Mayor called for any persons who deemed themselves affected by the proposed Bylaw No and Bylaw No , and who wished to be heard or present written submissions to come forward. Barry Wilford, 457 College Road: o questioned if the property could fit the 70 condos permitted under the current zoning and if the developer proceeds on that basis, can the Town require construction in accordance with the Building Code, covenants, and access, etc. o noted people have said it is time to move on after 1500 days of the mess on the property but he expressed concern that if the buildings are allowed as proposed in the rezoning it will affect people for a much longer period, years, as it is too big for a residential neighbourhood o noted Council was elected by the citizens, should do what citizens want and that it does not matter whether the developers are nice or not Ainsley Foster, 356 Windy Poplars Place, Nanaimo, representing the developer: o noted Council will hear from many residents tonight who are opposed and she emphasized that there is a silent majority in favour, a large number of which have contacted her in support of the project, and, most significantly, the immediate neighbours who are most impacted are strong supporters, while many of those opposed would not visually be affected by the development o quoted the Community Charter statement that Council must consider the well-being and interests of the municipality and the community o reported: there used to be a pub and a hotel with 72 rooms on site that was in bankruptcy and foreclosure the property is zoned commercial in the middle of a well-established residential neighbourhood the development, if approved, will bring to close four years of negotiation, provide a reasonable number of units, all of quality construction, a restored College building, and settle comprehensive rights to entitlement of compensation and litigation; on the number of studies and meetings and changes to the development plan on the work of Dr. Jill Oakes of the University of Manitoba on support of a consultant who taught community planning at UBC the Planning Department and the Advisory Planning Commission have recommended approval of the development Anthony Boni, architect for the developer, presented slides noting: o redevelopment features, dealing with trees, reducing the height of Building C by just

3 Page 3 of 12 over 1 metre o the number of units on the site o the use of infiltration for storm drainage o the photos showing the large scale of the heritage building, noting the new buildings are smaller in scale and noting the location of the elevator o the revised plan, including creating more of a gap between the heritage building and adjacent buildings o the stepped terraces going down into the units on the ground floor and more plantings along the west side o results of a major survey indicating which trees may be retained or removed, trees located on the neighbours property and how the path may wind through the trees o South/College Street elevation, west elevation, north elevation, and east elevation views and surveyed heights in reference to adjacent buildings o reviewed proposed building finishes o showed photograph views from various streets Jerry Schmidt, Developer s Consulting Geotechnical Engineer, EBA Engineering, reported: o on the size and experience of the EBA Engineering team and his experience o on their examination of the development, soils, and slope and their conclusion that this development will not have any negative impact on the slope as it is currently being designed o the design may improve the situation due to unloading from removal of soil, underground parking, drainage, and proper treatment of surface water as ground water and seepage is a major contributor to slope instability o standards keep changing, regulatory bodies and Building Codes require designing structures to withstand specific events o EBA conducted sophisticated analysis, and engineers will design accordingly, eg. if a magnitude 7 earthquake it will be designed for it and will do better than other older buildings in the neighbourhood o there will be further involvement by EBA during detailed design, to ensure that building meets proper codes Jill Oakes and Rick Riewe, University of Manitoba, presented slides reporting on the the research they began 10 years ago, her interest as her grandmother was a Qualicum Beach resident, and the focus of their studies on the Qualicum College boys school, noting: o the heritage importance of the Qualicum College history, and their research based on interviews with 150 of the old boys and other agencies o the Qualicum College is the best documented heritage building in BC due to the photo library and thanks to George Knight, the headmaster s brother o the architects of the Qualicum College were renowned and the school crest is still used in the Town, e.g. on the refuse containers o the headmaster was a leader in the community, and there are lots of stories about the flag pole and the plaque recognizing Harry Fullerton, recognizing being a responsible citizen in the community o George Knight was a composer, and the boys could be seen marching to church on

4 Page 4 of 12 Sunday o the boys competed in sporting events and its theatre was the first outdoor theatre on Vancouver Island, run by Ivan Thorne (CBC) o concluded it is really important for Qualicum Beach to maintain the Qualicum College heritage building as it is the most well researched, well documented historical building in BC Margaret Adair, 382 Judges Row, reported they bought a property that belonged to HR MacMillan, an important figure in the history of Qualicum Beach and Western Canada, and noted they: o own five ocean front lots and three lots on Burnham Road properties o they are a significant taxpayer in Qualicum Beach o are concerned: about their quality of living and they will look up to see three large buildings, close to the edge of the bluff towering above them, and five years of construction the proposed path will come close to them the development will affect their property value about the stability of the bluff digging into the bluff 2.5 metres will denude the bank for an extended period and fear that an already unstable bluff will be a potential disaster Pat Jacobson, 394 Burnham Road, expressed appreciation for the opportunity to speak and noted they are here because they care about Qualicum Beach, and presented slides noting: o the hopes and dreams embodied in the OCP which stipulates multi-family developments must be small in scale and form an integral part of neighbourhood o the scale and minimal neighbourhood impact of other multifamily developments, including: 431 West Crescent, 16 luxury condos Arbutus Street, Millstream Haven, 40 co-op homes Taylor Ridge 639 Arbutus, 26 condos Grandon Creek, 32 homes, blends in well with neighbourhood Arbutus and Laburnum, 108 multiresidential in neighbourhood Parkwood at Schley Place, one of the few two-storey condos Alderwood, 12 units 885 Berwick Park, 48 units, few neighbours Oceanside, 140 single family homes in a bare land strata, entrance to Pintail, and Eaglewood Court, 51 higher-end single family strata units, both unobtrusive to neighbours and examples of sensitive integration into existing neighbourhoods o the Villa Rosa scale is similar to the proposed development in dimensions and massing but it is located downtown and would be a nightmare in a neighbourhood o the importance of following the OCP

5 Page 5 of 12 Vernon MacKay, 235 Hoylake Rd. E stated he joins the citizens who oppose the development for the College Inn site, noting: o when he first invested in Qualicum Beach in 1980, Qualicum Beach was fondly known as a seaside resort Town, but it has regressed to be a seaside community o gone are many of the enterprises and the commercial vibrancy of earlier times o it seems Council and administration staff believe they need to accommodate the developer over the interests and wishes of the citizens, which renders the OCP a sham o he questions why the zoning and height change is being pushed in advance of the OCP review o he urges Council to stop the spread of large condominiums outside of the village centre o Council has a fiduciary duty of care to the electorate of Qualicum Beach and not to the owner/developer of the College Inn site o the OCP review could provide an opportunity to restore the economic viability of Qualicum Beach ElaineWilson, 374 Hemsworth, reported: o that as the plans stand, they face a large building which totally eliminates their view of the mountains and the sea o there will be a large garage door opening that will face onto their deck, and the cars that come out of that garage will seem to be heading straight towards their property o there will be a fence but it will be of little help in the evening when the headlights will shine right into their place and there will be noise from cars travelling on an incline rather than on a flat route o ornamental trees proposed may be deciduous and will not prevent headlights shining into her property but a hedge may help o their concerns and questioned what did they do to deserve the triple whammy of reduced property value, headlights glaring into their property and increased noise on their deck o they have paid taxes for 30 years. Joanne Hill, 482 Bayview Terrace, stated: o she sees the College Inn every morning as she pulls into her driveway o she lives in the former headmaster s (Ivan Knight) home and he made sacrifices to keep the College going o she felt great sadness for the neglect of the building, supports Dr. Oakes findings, and is concerned that it has been four years since the saga began, and the neighbourhood homeowners pride in their homes contrasts with the developer s lack of care of the heritage building o Terry Smith s preference would have been to bulldoze the building o a logical compromise would be to give the developer the lucrative zoning but keep the height to 7.5 m, bring the buildings back from the side lot lines and 20 m from the vulnerable bluff o this is the largest development ever proposed to be built on bluff, it is groundbreaking and we need to abandon the attitude that they are nice guys so they can

6 Page 6 of 12 o we need to preserve for the future o this is not the first inappropriate development ever proposed in Qualicum Beach; a destination hotel was proposed for Eaglecrest in the 1980 s but the citizens opposed it, Council of the day supported the community and it was developed as residential o Council also backed residents when Eaglecrest golf course wanted to do a residential development and when the Brown property was threatened, the Heritage Forest resulted o they elected this Council to protect the residents, even if it means saying no to some developers Marilyn Buchan, 438 Judges Row, resident directly below Building C, on the waterfront, reported: o she is concerned about the setback on the bank o she cannot get insurance to protect her property from damage if there is a catastrophe o the developer can still make money if they claw it back from the edge of the bank and reduce the height, and be fair to the residents of the community o her concern that the priorities are mixed up o she is not opposed to development but is concerned the company is going for the max and the development needs to be scaled back to fit into the community and so people below the bank can feel safe Dave Golson, 578 Memorial Avenue, acknowledged he does not live near the development, but lives near another development that received zoning and height variances, and expressed concern about a trend in Oceanside, referencing three developments: Island Hall to Beach Club, Qualicum Beach Resort Hotel and this one. He stated all three have monolithic blocks, all three are on a slope, and developers asked for a change in zoning and in height. He recommended Council retain a height of 7 metres instead of 9 metres and require 3D scaled models for rezonings. Frank Horner, 400 First Avenue W, stated he would reiterate what he said at the last meeting, noting: o we have a developer who has been cooperative making changes as suggested, but they are insistent that the sort of development they are proposing is the only way they will go, and that single-family is out o on the other side, we have neighbours who are against it, and around Town others who oppose it as it is contrary to the OCP, so there is a strong objection to what is being opposed o Council must decide if they are going to support the developer or the citizens of Qualicum Beach and what they want Qualicum Beach to look like o he is concerned it has been going on for four years which is unfair to the developer and the people waiting for something to happen, good or bad o he requests Council make a decision at this meeting and, if the Town says no, maybe the Town could take the property off the developer s hands, or if the answer is yes, let the developer get on with it as it will take some time to construct Ellis Achtem, owner of 301 Hall Road, stated he can t see the buildings and won t if built, and noted:

7 Page 7 of 12 o he wants to know who the developer is o the developer s representative stated people support the development but no one he has spoken with support it o he is here because people oppose it, and he thanked Pat Jacobsen for Sandy Horsland, Jim Tate, and himself, who built most of the low-rise developments in her presentation o what staff and Council want to do with this development is not good enough for Qualicum Beach and he opposed the development which is contrary to the OCP and zoning and the wishes of the citizens o he questioned why staff and Council want it to proceed noting he has heard it has been going on too long, the Town may be in a tight spot because of the heritage designation, or the Town wants to make some money to buy some more white trucks for high-priced drivers o the property was purchased in 2006 in a high property value year ($3.2 million), perhaps expecting it to increase in value but it was a poor hotel operation, and asked whether Council has met the developer or if they knew the names Dean Pomeroy, Randolf Gee, Henry David Hubbard, and Tyrone Smith as those people are on a document registered in Land Title and on a large mortgage that is due in full in August 2011, which, he concluded, is why they need to cram a lot of units into that space Jim Christakos, 493 Bayview Terrace, questioned the integrity of the planning process in the Town, the OCP review process and the problem of ad hoc decisions made outside of the OCP process, suggesting the decision today is a major one which is of such a large scale that it should be part of the OCP review. Paul Kyba, 404 Burnham Road, reported he and his wife came to Qualicum Beach in 2003 to consider retiring here, rented a cottage on the beach to start, living here part time and, liking the quality of life and focus on managed growth, bought a home on the corner of Hemsworth and Burnham across from a vacant hotel with zoning height limitations of 7.5 m. He reviewed the history since then, noting the hotel was sold in 2006, staff were terminated, and a new development proposed with three large condominium buildings, and, subsequently, a resort condo development is threatened, and a lawsuit. He noted the heritage building was left derelict, and a redesign proposed. He acknowledged there have been opportunities for public input, but expressed concern stating they feel there is a breach of their trust if Council allows an 11 metre building height. He asked that Council not approve this proposal. Judy Harty, 407 Palm Drive, reiterated what she said the last time: this development is way too big for the property expected to hold it and the neighbourhood that is expected to accept it and it is out of line. Barb Van Hove, 465 College Road, stated she would like to see a development on the property but not at the scale currently proposed as she understood it would be a 7.5 m. height maximum. She questioned why Town staff would support height exemptions and why Council would support a development that does not comply with the OCP, particularly in a small residential neighbourhood. She noted the people of Qualicum Beach spoke out at the last meeting and at this meeting, and she urged Council to do the right thing.

8 Page 8 of 12 Bob Byam, 461 College Road, presented slides displaying photos based on the last meeting when the developer was going for an 11 metre building height, showing the impact if the buildings were that height, noting: o 457 College Road roof line o Entrance to Knight Terrace before with College Inn in the background, and after if the 11 metre building C is constructed o From College Road before and after with the condo next to it o From his property before and after with the condo o From Knight Terrace before (with College Inn in the background) and with building C at 11 metres o Building C will dominate the landscape which he feels is unacceptable o it is unacceptable that the developers and Town planners have ignored the OCP o when they bought their property they knew the property was zoned for commercial with a 7.5 m limit and the proposed change is unacceptable Sam Coval, 444 Judges Row, expressed appreciation to be one of the line-up, reported he has taken a poll and found that people have overwhelmingly chosen to live in Qualicum Beach because they value in their daily lives privacy, enjoyment of property, predictability peacefulness, beauty, or to be a lifestyle conservative, and how these hopes and values are supported through the OCP, zoning and other bylaws. He suggested that those most affected by the proposed development have been active against it but essentially disadvantaged by the process as the process is unfair. He noted the proposed development has not been judged against these life choice standards and asked how can these ideals can lose to what is offered by this development. He stated the developer s setbacks, particularly at the rear of the property are at the bare minimum, are up to 11.1 m instead of the 7.5 m, and plans afoot to gain a view that has not been available, and what is good for the developer is a loss for citizens. He expressed concern that the life values and residents opinions are set aside resulting in a loss of privacy, safety and peacefulness. He asked that the development go forward but not with inferior concern for the existing neighbours, and proposed Council move the following amendments: 1. Setback at the rear of the old College property shall not be 10 m but 16 m from the existing bank top 2. The maximum height of the three new buildings shall not exceed the 7.5 m of the current zoning o Scott Tanner, 563 Crescent Road W, stated he would like to see the Dr. Jill Oakes historical presentation in full, and representing the Qualicum Beach Resident s Association: o read the following motion adopted by the QBRA: THAT the QBRA Board of Directors support the Official Community Plan in its current form and oppose any amendment prior to full community consultation through the OCP renewal process; AND FURTHER THAT the QBRA is concerned about changes by Council to the current OCP without meaningful community consultation and ignoring the wishes of property owners in the immediate neighbourhood; FURTHER they are concerned about the increase in height of the building from 7.5 m to 11 m, now in question where it will be measured from; FURTHER concerned about the stability of the bluff where the structures will be located o reminded Council members of their contractual obligation to listen, consider and make a

9 Page 9 of 12 decision, and asked where are the residents that support this application o suggested Council needs to consider the impact of the development on the neighbours and the future, and asked what if someone wants to develop a hotel or a private school o noted this may be the largest development proposed in Qualicum Beach, the time it may take to complete the project, and the precedent if approved o asked Council to consider the comments of those who spoke tonight, noting this type of development will not increase the tax base, and it is, at best revenue-neutral o reminded Councillor Becker that at the time there was an application for a change to the OCP adjacent to the Middle School, he made a plea to the existing Council to not change the OCP, and concluded these neighbours deserve the same treatment Art Skipsey, 383 Crescent Road W, stated he was wearing two hats, one to represent the QB Historial and Museum Society, in support of maintaining the College heritage building and the other, for his own general comments, emphasizing the importance of acting in the best interest of the community which is broader than neighbourhood or self interest, which has been the trend since He noted he lives near the condos on the Crescent, the decision to build to a lower height and the benefit of hotel rooms. He noted he also lives on a bluff and the importance of good management of water and habitat on banks, which is easier and safer through a multi-residential development than a single family development. Yvonne Zarowny, 400 Dorset Road, stated she was asked to become involved by some of the residents in the neighbourhood, is impressed with the NQBRA and the amount of time spent by Town staff, questioned why so much time has been spent on revamping the proposal when it is contrary to the OCP, and spoke in support of a development providing diversity for our economy. She asked Council to support the OCP, not take any action before the OCP review is complete, and particulary to send a clear signal to attract good developers, good planners, set a precedent, respect the OCP and stop wasting taxpayer money. Beverli Rasaiah, 395 Burnham Road, stated she lives next door to the College Inn, moved here years ago expecting to maintain the privacy they have, and feels a breach of trust with what has now been proposed on the neighbouring property as they will not have the privacy and feeling of safety. She noted on the suggestion it is down-zoning, that the massing, the 40 units that could hold 40 families is way too large for the community, the height is too much, and she feels angry and frustrated. She expressed concern that it has gone on way too long, feels Council is not listening, it is awful for the people on Knight Terrace and College Road, and she questioned why this is occurring. Ellis Achtem, owner of 301 Hall Road, questioned why Council does not get it and asked if there is a problem with the heritage designation or has staff told the developer something. He concluded Council could make two mistakes tonight by giving these people the zoning and acknowledging somehow that the Town owes them something. He stated he would rather pay his share of the taxes, rather than give in, if there is a lawsuit. He questioned if the development would proceed due to debt load and concluded the proposal is completely out of sync for the area. Jack Menzies, 432 Judges Row, resident directly below the bank, speaking on behalf of himself and his wife, spoke about safety, noting that at times he has people for a pickle ball tournament, and expressed concern if there is a slide. He noted he wrote to Council and Bob Weir about the slide in North Vancouver where the municipality has had to spend

10 Page 10 of 12 millions to purchase the properties. He stated he used to own a lot on Butterball near the property where the house was knocked off its foundation. He bought the Judges Row property in 1980, rebuilt 20 years later and took the Town and developer to court in 1980 which is why there is a park on the bank, and he asked the Council to realize what they are trying to do. Councillor Avis left the meeting at 9:08 p.m. Joan Greaves, 450 Knight Terrace, stated the term to use is not soil as it is sand and clay Beverly Shipley, 2526 Island Highway W, stated why should she waste her time to fill out an OCP survey when it is not adhered to and dismissed which she does not appreciate Dave Bryan, 765 Memorial Avenue, stated we need to stop and pay attention to what people have to say, a Quality of Life Survey is coming soon, the OCP process is an opportunity to do something right, find out what people want so we do not have these problems again, as we have had 4 or 5 disasters in the past 5 years and nothing gets built Councillor Avis returned to the meeting at 9:12 p.m. Dave Bryan continued, noting that we need to develop common ground. He recommended putting the Quality of Life Survey on the back burner, letting everyone have a run at it so there is a great OCP process, solid planning, and not cutesy sustainability gobbledy gook. Rory Moloney, 434 Knight Terrace, read a letter from his wife Mary Maness, about her history in real estate in another community and the trend of monolithic condos replacing 1930s homes, concern about inappropriate rezoning, and cautioned against developers who are not residents shaping our community, our zoning, and our neighbourhood Sam Coval, 444 Judges Row, reported he has seen several proposals from the developers that all have a single outstanding feature comparing the proposed zoning to the current zoning, which is worse. He stated he does not believe the developer will go back to the existing zoning, and that if they were going to go back to it, they would have by now. The Mayor called for the first time for persons who wished to be heard or present written submissions to come forward. Dave Golson, 578 Memorial Avenue, noted we are close to a fault, Christchurch had liquefaction where the soil went fluid, and questioned when you excavate soil, are you going to be more stable or less stable, than if you had 20 bi-level bungalows. He expressed concern that we will get the study after these things have been approved. Anthony Boni, architect for the developer, commented on design issues that were raised, including: an arborist will review plans for revegetation/bank stabilization; ground floor museum displays and the flag pole; the view of the building from Judges Row is minimal; the street views of other developments showed mature landscaping and some of the scales were similar; will examine hedging or screening regarding the neighbour s impact of lights; large setbacks substantially larger than zoning; the building was not designated heritage at the time they bought the development; regarding existing zoning, it allows for smaller setback and twice as much lot coverage and twice as many units but 7.5 m height instead of average 9 m height proposed; other things talked about in the past is the roof shape and if they went to the flat roof it would be within the 7.5 m Jerry Schmidt, consulting engineer for the developer, reported regarding: soil removal at the top and removal of the vegetation during construction that they take precautions, soil control and erosion control measures will be taken; statement that a 20 m setback is appropriate,

11 Page 11 of 12 development will not have an impact on the stability of the slope and will marginally improve it, having one development at the top is a lot more controllable than having five different residents; regarding Dave Golson s comment about soil examination done later, they have gone through soil analysis already and the data will be given to the structural engineer so the building is built to a very high standard, much different than a house or older building; excavation will not make soil weaker; comment about liquefaction in Christchurch, liquefaction is one of the first things they consider and they would have prevented the development already if it was liquefiable; and concluded the development should not impact the safety of the slope or the safety of the people at the toe of the slope and a setback of 10 m or 20 m should not impact negatively Paul Kyba, 404 Burnham Road, on the issue of the designation of the old building s heritage status although it was not done when purchased it was started and due diligence would have shown the discussions at Council and it is in the OCP stating its importance to the Town as a tourist resource. Yvonne Zarowny, 400 Dorset Road, stated she is not anti-development but is concerned about appropriate development, anyone moving into the College Inn neighbourhood in the past 10 years knew it was not a sustainable enterprise. She reported she examined the economic gap survey and that this and the Sunset Inn may not be appropriate as a destination resort, however, there is a need for tourist accommodation, economic stimulation to bring diverse demographics, and Council needs to send a signal to attract good architects and a development that could take into consideration the concerns of the residents of the neighbourhood. The Mayor called three times for any persons who deemed themselves affected by the proposed Bylaw No and Bylaw No , and who wished to be heard or present written submissions to come forward. As no one responded to the call for persons to be heard or present submissions, the Mayor declared the hearing closed at 9:35 p.m. Councillor Wilson MOVED and Councillor Brouilette SECONDED, THAT Council take a 10 minute recess. CARRIED Meeting recessed: 9:35 p.m. Meeting resumed: 9:45 p.m. with all of Council in attendance. BYLAWS Councillor Wilson MOVED and Councillor Becker SECONDED, THAT Council refers consideration of third reading of the bylaws entitled Town of Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 590, 2005, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 and Town of Qualicum Beach Land Use and Subdivision Bylaw No. 580,1999, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 to the September 13, 2010 Council meeting. MOTION DEFEATED Bylaw No Councillor Brouilette MOVED and Councillor Wilson SECONDED, THAT the bylaw entitled Town of Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 590, 2005, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 be read a third time.

12 Page 12 of 12 Councillor Avis MOVED and Councillor Becker SECONDED, THAT Council extends the meeting to continue past 10:00 p.m. CARRIED MAIN MOTION ON THE FLOOR: THAT the bylaw entitled Town of Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 590, 2005, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 be read a third time. Councillor Wilson MOVED and Councillor Brouilette SECONDED, THAT Council refers the motion on the floor for staff to discuss with the developer the height of the building, setback from slope and monolithic style of the building. MOTION DEFEATED MAIN MOTION ON THE FLOOR: THAT the bylaw entitled Town of Qualicum Beach Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 590, 2005, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 be read a third time. MOTION DEFEATED Bylaw No Councillor Wilson MOVED and Councillor Brouilette SECONDED, THAT the bylaw entitled Town of Qualicum Beach Land Use and Subdivision Bylaw No. 580, 1999, Amendment (431 College Road) Bylaw No , 2010 be read a third time. MOTION DEFEATED ADJOURNMENT Councillor Becker MOVED and Councillor Wilson SECONDED, Council adjourns the meeting. CARRIED Meeting Adjourned: 10:20 p.m. Certified Correct: Trudy Coates, Corporate Administrator Teunis Westbroek Mayor