July 21, 2025 - Minutes

Date:

Monday, July 21, 2025

Place:

Anderson Room
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie, Chair
Councillor Chak Au
Councillor Carol Day
Councillor Laura Gillanders
Councillor Kash Heed
Councillor Andy Hobbs
Councillor Alexa Loo
Councillor Bill McNulty
Councillor Michael Wolfe

Call to Order:

The Chair called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.

MINUTES

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee held on July 7, 2025, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

DELEGATION

1.

Yannick Simovich, Board Chair, Tourism Richmond, and Nancy Small, CEO, Tourism Richmond, with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file, City Clerk’s Office), provided an update on Tourism Richmond’s work.

FINANCE AND CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION

2.

Richmond Food Hub: Public Engagement Feedback

(File Ref. No. 08-4150-20-001) (REDMS No. 8063716)

Staff noted a further report will be provided in the fall.

It was moved and seconded

That the staff report titled “Richmond Food Hub: Public Engagement Feedback”, dated June 30, 2025, from the Director, Business Services, be received for information.

The question on the motion was not called as in reply to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) the formal public consultation period has concluded, though they are happy to receive additional feedback, (ii) the report before you outlines the feedback received during the public consultation phase, and (iii) a presentation of options, informed by both the consultation and further research, will be brought forward in the fall.

The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED.

3.

Richmond Tourism Master Plan: Public Engagement Feedback

(File Ref. No. 08-4150-03-01) (REDMS No. 8083734)

It was moved and seconded

That the staff report titled “Richmond Tourism Master Plan: Public Engagement Feedback”, dated June 30, 2025, from the Director, Business Services, be received for information.

The question on the motion was not called, as in reply to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) during the consultation, there was strong interest in multi-use and larger spaces than those currently available, (ii) the feedback received highlighted interest in Richmond’s unique role within the region, (iii) the report before Committee summarizes the public input received, with the next report to present a draft plan, (iv) while a 10-year Net Promoter Score (NPS) is not available specifically for the City of Richmond, data from Tourism Richmond provides related insights, and (v) significant feedback was received regarding transit access and connectivity, which will be addressed as the Master Plan continues to be developed.

The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED.

LAW AND COMMUNITY SAFETY DIVISION

4.

Amendments to Consolidated Fees Bylaw No. 8636 – Schedule Parking (Off-Street) Regulation Bylaw No. 7403

(File Ref. No. 12-8375-00) (REDMS No. 8085646)

In response to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) the legislation requires this amendment and similar taxes have been implemented in other municipalities and regions within the South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority, (ii) parking taxes collected are used to fund road and transit operations across the region, (iii) the introduction of variable rates during peak and non-peak hours is currently under consideration, (iv) shuttles operating under Metro Vancouver fall under the same taxation framework and are included as part of the overall system improvements, (v) more prominent signage can be installed to clearly communicate these changes, and (vi) all revenue collected through the tax is remitted directly to TransLink.

It was moved and seconded

That Consolidated Fees Bylaw No. 8636, Amendment Bylaw No. 10694, be introduced and given first, second and third reading.

CARRIED
Opposed:  Cllrs. Day
Gillanders
Heed
Wolfe

PARKS, RECREATION & CULTURE DIVISION

5.

Minoru Park Vision Plan Update: Renewed Scope of Work, Process and Next Steps

(File Ref. No. 06-2345-20-MINO1) (REDMS No. 7839503)

The Committee noted (i) the importance of maintaining Minoru Park as a balance between an active and community passive park, and (ii) with the current need for additional parking, the implementation of a parkade should be considered as early as possible.

In response to queries from Committee, staff advised (i) no decisions have been made with respect to relocating the cricket pitch to another park site, and (ii) staff have communicated with the Richmond Cricket Club and learned of the recent growth in the sport with strong demand for a youth league that cannot be accommodated with the single cricket pitch at Minoru Park; staff will further analyse through the sport courts and field strategy, and outcomes will be coordinated with the renewed Minoru Park vision plan process.

It was moved and seconded

That a renewed Minoru Park Vision Plan process and scope of work, as outlined in the staff report “Minoru Park Vision Plan Update: Renewed Scope of Work, Process and Next Steps”, dated June 30, 2025, from the Director, Parks Services, be approved.

CARRIED

ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION

6.

Moray Bridge Replacement Planning Study Update

(File Ref. No. 10-6500-04) (REDMS No. 8091039)

Staff provided an overview of the staff report and, with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file, City Clerk’s Office), reviewed the Moray Bridge replacement and road network options the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MoTT) has developed and is seeking feedback.

Staff advised that (i) based on staff’s review of the three Moray Bridge replacement options proposed, Option 2 – north of existing bridge, appears to have the minimum impacts on property and the City’s existing road network, (ii) since the June 16, 2025 General Purposes Committee meeting, MoTT has confirmed it is no longer considering closure of the Highway 99 exit ramp to No. 4 Road, therefore none of the road network options contemplate that exit being closed as part of their road network changes, (iii) staff’s review of the three road network options proposed reduce connectivity within the City’s network and do not align with the City’s transportation, urban design or liveability goals in the downtown core, (iv) MoTT has advised that their options do represent a point in time and they will work to refine these options as part of their planning study and in consideration of City feedback, and (v) MoTT anticipate completing their planning study in November 2025.

In response to queries from Committee, staff noted MoTT is currently exploring high level concepts and ideas, the technical assessment would be part of the future phases of the planning study, and a rigorous traffic assessment would be part of future stages of the planning study.

The Committee expressed concerns regarding future plans to address the anticipated increase in traffic volume and consideration for how to ensure the flow of traffic is continuous.

It was moved and seconded

That the comments as described in the staff report titled “Moray Bridge Replacement Planning Study Update”, dated July 10, 2025, from the Director, Transportation, be endorsed and forwarded to the Ministry of Transportation and Transit.

CARRIED

DEPUTY CAO’S OFFICE

7.

Referral Response: Establishment of the Low-End Market Rental Parking, Tenant Asset and Income Exceedance Policy

(File Ref. No. 08-4057-05) (REDMS No. 8058328)

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the Low-End Market Rental Parking, Tenant Asset and Income Exceedance Council Policy, as outlined in the report titled “Referral Response: Establishment of the Low-End Market Rental Parking, Tenant Asset and Income Exceedance Policy”, dated June 25, 2025,

from the Director, Housing, be approved; and

(2)

That the terms used to enable the owner of Low-End Market Rental units to charge tenants for parking and to set an asset test limit for tenants be used in housing agreements for any conditionally approved rezoning applications, being those for which a zoning amendment bylaw has been given third reading and an associated housing agreement has yet to be executed as of July 28, 2025, notwithstanding the terms of any executed rezoning considerations letter.

The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued with respect to parking stall charges and asset test limits.

In response to queries from Committee, staff noted (i) the policy for consideration would not allow the LEMR unit owner to charge for the use of an accessible parking stall, (ii) to allow for any parking stall charges, an amendment to the existing housing agreement would be needed upon the turnover of a LEMR tenancy (iii) the manager at Kiwanis Towers confirmed a $350,000 asset limit for its tenants, noting that there are senior tenants that have very little income (if any) but holding on to a certain amount of assets they rely on to support their living; similarly, operators of other seniors housing have expressed the need for a higher asset test limit for seniors upwards of $300,000-$350,000, to accommodate those tenants without an income and only their savings, (iv) the $100,000 LEMR asset and income limit per household is in alignment with both the BC Housing and the Metro Vancouver Housing asset test limit, (v) staff rely on the owner/operator to gather and declare the required information, which could also be further verified by staff requesting receipt of the documents to ensure the integrity of the LEMR program, and (vi) TFSAs are not specifically identified but would likely be treated as a liquid asset and therefore would be included in the asset limit.

The question on motion was then called and it was CARRIED.

8.

Housing Priorities Grant Program Allocation

(File Ref. No. 08-4057-05) (REDMS No. 8063991)

In response to queries from Committee, staff noted (i) at this point the City is not committed to providing the funding, the intention is to set aside the money so there is an awareness and some certainty of the applicant they have access to the funding, subject to addressing certain requirements, and (ii) with all of the proposed grant allocations there are several additional opportunities for Council to make a decision.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the proposed grant allocations for the Housing Priorities Grant Program, as outlined in the report titled “Housing Priorities Grant Program Allocation”, dated June 25, 2025, from the Director, Housing, be approved, and that the following amounts be awarded:

(a)

Sun Valley Rental Ltd.– $1,764,000

(b)

1166225 B.C. Ltd. – $1,003,000

(c)

Aashyn No. 3 Road Development Ltd.– $108,000

(d)

Richmond Kiwanis Senior Citizens Housing Society – $2,320,000

(e)

BC Indigenous Housing Society – $4,160,000

(2)

That the Chief Administrative Officer and Deputy Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to negotiate and execute two Non-Profit Organization Stream 1A Grant Funding contribution agreements as set out in the grant allocation for the Housing Priorities Grant Program, and to negotiate and execute any amendments thereto and ancillary agreements;

(3)

That Development Cost Charges Waiver for Affordable Housing (6071 Azure Road) Bylaw No. 10695 be introduced and given first, second, and third readings;

(4)

That Development Cost Charges Waiver for Affordable Housing (8880 Cook Road) Bylaw No. 10696 be introduced and given first, second, and third readings; and

(5)

That Development Cost Charges Waiver for Affordable Housing (9000 No 3 Road) Bylaw No. 10697 be introduced and given first, second, and third readings.

CARRIED

9.

Establishing a Housing Authority – REFERRAL RESPONSE #2

(File Ref. No. 08-4057-05) (REDMS No. 8074070)

Discussion ensued with respect to the role of the City’s housing office.  It was suggested that research from other municipalities, particularly information on how the City can be more involved in building more affordable housing, was suggested.

In response to a query from Committee, staff noted the analysis focusses on a housing authority because the City would have more control over the entity and the outcome.

It was moved and seconded

That options and opportunities to establish a housing authority or other housing structure be brought forward for Council consideration on a case-by-case basis considering the details presented in the report titled “Establishing a Housing Authority - Referral Response #2”, from the Director, Housing, dated June 25, 2025.

CARRIED
Opposed:  Cllr. Loo

10.

Works Yard Replacement Project – Program, Form, Phasing and Budget

(File Ref. No. 06-2000-01) (REDMS No. 8015242)

In response to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) they have optimized and reorganized storage to reduce wasted space, implemented efficient material storage methods, and centralized storage, (ii) City-owned properties on Lynas Lane total 30.2 acres; the Works Yard will occupy 22 acres, while the Recycling Depot, Parks House and Skate Board Park occupy 3.7 acres and are not within the scope of this project, (iii) staff recommend initiating the formal planning process for the approximately 4.5 acres of the remaining unallocated land, (iv) the Oversight Committee supported the three phase approach to the project and offered feedback, staff reviewed the input and incorporated those suggestions that improved project efficiency, (v) the Oversight Committee meeting minutes are attached to the report, should Council prefer, minutes of the meeting can be included in the monthly Works Yard report, (vi) to reduce time and risk, the scope from Phase 2 of the project has been moved to Phase 1, eliminating the need for four phases, (vii) staff will include the additional email correspondence received from the Oversight Committee in the next Oversight Committee meeting minutes for Council, and (viii) once Phase 1 is approved, staff will begin working on detailed designs, and during that time will expedite the ground densification and soil works and will initiate designing Phase 2 while Phase 1 is being constructed.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the program totalling approximately 400,000 sq. ft. and building form be approved, as outlined in the report titled “Works Yard Replacement Project – Program, Form, Phasing and Budget”, dated July 7, 2025, from the Director, Facilities and Project Development;

(2)

That in order to reduce the overall project schedule, and manage cost escalation risks, the workshop program and other elements be added to the scope of work for Phase 1 and a capital submission for the Works Yard Replacement - Enabling Works and Phase 1 capital projects’ scope change and budget increase of $74.0 million (2025 dollars), be endorsed for Council’s consideration as part of the 2026 budget process; and

(3)

That staff begin the planning process for the balance of the unallocated land, as outlined in the report titled “Works Yard Replacement Project – Program, Form, Phasing and Budget”, dated July 7, 2025, from the Director, Facilities and Project Development.

CARRIED
Opposed:  Cllr. Loo

COUNCILLOR KASH HEED

11.

Deloitte recommendation to cap the maximum remuneration for total income from all local government related appointments

(File Ref. No.) (REDMS No.)

Councillor Heed provided a background to his recommendation.

Mayor Brodie referred to his correspondence and supporting attachments, provided to the Committee (attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 1).

The following motion was then introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the motion:

(1)

That the Mayor, as our representative on the Board of Directors for Metro Vancouver, introduce a motion amending their “Remuneration Bylaw” (Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Board and Committee Remuneration Bylaw Number 1057, 2007) to allow Directors the flexibility to voluntarily refuse compensation for serving on the Board or Committees; and

(2)

That the Mayor voluntarily accept the cap or maximum remuneration threshold for total income from all local government related appointments as detailed in recommendation #49 of the Deloitte Metro Vancouver Governance Review,

be tabled.

The question on the motion was not called as discussion took place on the merits and rationale of the motion.

The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Cllrs. Day, Heed and Wolfe opposed.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (5:37 p.m.).

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the General Purposes Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Monday, July 21, 2025.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie
Chair

Lorraine Anderson
Legislative Services Associate