Anmore South Community Engagement

Thanks for checking in. We have two questions for you posted on Monday, May 12, 2025, and we are working on responses, but we do not see any questions from 10 days ago.

The purpose of a Council meeting is to govern the Village, make decisions on important matters, and represent the interests of the community. In accordance with the Community Charter and Roberts Rules of Order, Council Meetings are not designed to support conversations or debate with members of the public. 

The legislative requirement is to hold a Council meeting in public so that the community can observe. There is no legislative requirement for the public to speak or engage with Council at meeting; however, although other municipalities across the province have removed these public input opportunities, in Anmore, we have continued to offer both a comment and a question period at our Council meetings. That said, we have updated our Procedure Bylaw to provide clear standards for public input – and public conduct – to ensure that we are adhering to recent changes to the provincial Local Government Act and to support a more consistent approach to how this input period is managed.

Members of the public also have numerous ways to interact with or contact elected officials including email, phone, or in person. Correspondence received addressed to Mayor and Council is circulated to all members of Council. 

The application of this Procedure Bylaw is not about the time ahead of a Public Hearing, it is about when a matter is officially in a review process. When a bylaw amendment or new bylaw is being considered, Council members are required to keep an open mind and should not be involved in debate or discussion with the public at a Council meeting as it can appear they have already formed an opinion before the full review process is complete. In the case of a bylaw amendment, this would apply after a bylaw receives first reading, which officially starts the review process. 

The new requirements under the Procedure Bylaw apply to delegations, public question period and public comment period and in all cases, Council will not acknowledge questions related to matters where a bylaw may be subject to a Public Hearing, or where a Public Hearing has been waived or not permitted. Essentially, it means that these matters will not be discussed and debated with the public at a Council meeting. Individuals can still share input/comments. For example, a delegation can present information on a topic of their choice, but Council will not respond to questions if the matter meets the above criteria. At comment period, the public can share comments about items on the agenda, but Council will not respond to questions if they relate to matters that meet the above criteria. So if Anmore South is on the agenda, and a members of the public want to share input on that matter, they can do so. The input will be heard, it just won't involve a debate or discussion with Council.

We will try to explain it a different way. 

The new requirements under the Procedure Bylaw apply to delegations, public question period and public comment period and in all cases, Council will not acknowledge questions related to matters where a bylaw may be subject to a Public Hearing, or where a Public Hearing has been waived or not permitted. Essentially, it means that these matters will not be discussed and debated with the public at a Council meeting. Individuals can still share input/comments. 

For example, a delegation can present information on a topic of their choice, but Council will not respond to questions if the matter meets the above criteria. At comment period, the public can share comments about items on the agenda, but Council will not respond to questions if they relate to matters that meet the above criteria. So if Anmore South is on the agenda, and a members of the public want to share input on that matter, they can do so. The input will be heard, it just won't involve a debate or discussion with Council.

A small subdivision means subdivisions that meet the following criteria:

(a) subdivision of one or two lots or a subdivision by which fewer than three additional lots would be created if the parcel proposed to be subdivided was itself created by subdivision within the past five years. 

(b) the consolidation of existing parcels. 

Anything larger than a small subdivision would require a sewer connection.

Regarding the OCP, please see our responses to your previous questions. 

Regarding communication to residents and opportunities for input: The Village has sent out direct communication to residents on multiple occasions with information mailed to households and through emails using the Village's e-mail notification system. As well, the information is posted on both the Village website and HaveYourSayAnmore.com. We have used outdoor signs to raise awareness, hosted a tent at Ma Murray Day, and have had multiple open houses and displays at Village Hall. 

Regarding holding a survey, we recently completed a community survey. 

Regarding asking residents for input separate from the developer, in addition to the various methods noted, we also held workshops. In Phase 1, this included a separate workshop room in the boardroom, where only Village staff were in attendance and participants were invited to share their input on the proposed vision for Anmore South. 

Regarding a referendum, there are several reasons why referendums are not used for land use decisions.  

1. Council makes the decision related to OCP amendments. They are responsible for keeping an open mind and considering the needs and best interest of the community today and 10, 20, 50+ years in the future. When making a decision, it is not about their personal preferences. Council considers multiple factors, including technical studies, community engagement, Village policies and plans, risks and opportunities for Anmore’s future and requirements from other levels of government. 
2. Community members only need to consider what they want, what it means to Anmore today and how it affects them as individuals. Their input is still important, which is why there have been multiple opportunities over the past year to provide input on the OCP Amendment Application and Neighbourhood Plan. However, this input is to help inform Council’s decision making, not make the decision for them. 
3. A referendum is not binding as it doesn’t apply to OCP amendments, as the legislative process for an OCP amendment is set out in the Local Government Act, which means that it would essentially be a survey with one question, available to the community at one brief point in time. 
4. The question itself is a challenge, as it is not easy to convey the scope of what should be considered in one question, and there are often conflicting priorities in responses. As an example, through the engagement process to date, we have learned that some residents do not want diversity in housing but at the same time, also want to protect the maximum amount of green space – so what is the true priority? Others have indicated support for having commercial options locally and would also like more recreation amenities, but want single-detached homes and density in the area to be the same as the rest of Anmore. This doesn’t work under the current RS-1 zoning. By holding a community survey asking residents to share their priorities, particularly related to the key factors that differentiate the Preferred Plan from the current zoning, residents can weigh in on multiple different aspects of the proposed vision for the property – not just respond to one, yes/no question with limited scope and no option to provide additional context. 

When presenting the OCP Bylaw amendment to Council as part of first reading, one option was to do a complete update of the OCP; however, the decision was to proceed with the OCP amendment first. 

However, the process being followed to amend the OCP has included a community engagement process that is consistent with a full update to an OCP to provide residents with multiple opportunities to provide input on this proposed amendment and Neighbourhood Plan. Also, the development of the Neighbourhood Plan provides a broader policy to help guide development if approved. As part of the Neighbourhood Plan development, the Applicant’s planning team and Village staff review and take into account related policies, which includes the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy. As well, the process to consider a change in the land use designation includes an application to Metro Vancouver for approval of this change. 

It is also notable that considering an amendment to the OCP based on an actual application rather than just in general terms responds directly to input from the community that was provided back in 2021. At that time, residents who participated in the engagement told the Village that they wanted more information about what would specifically be proposed for land use. They also wanted to see policy that would ensure the proposed plan was implemented within those guidelines. 

That is what the Village has done through this process.

When presenting the OCP Bylaw amendment to Council as part of first reading, one option was to do a complete update of the OCP; however, the decision was to proceed with the OCP amendment first. 

However, the process being followed to amend the OCP has included a community engagement process that is consistent with a full update to an OCP to provide residents with multiple opportunities to provide input on this proposed amendment and Neighbourhood Plan. Also, the development of the Neighbourhood Plan provides a broader policy to help guide development if approved. As part of the Neighbourhood Plan development, the Applicant’s planning team and Village staff review and take into account related policies, which includes the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy. As well, the process to consider a change in the land use designation includes an application to Metro Vancouver for approval of this change. 

The Village will be looking at the timing for updating its OCP.  

Regarding the process to consider this application and having icona’s planning team provide a Neighbourhood Plan as part of the OCP Amendment application, there is a clearly defined review process in the Terms of Reference and the Village staff and consultants assess the application and all submitted materials to ensure everything complies with those terms and the Village’s policies.   

It is also notable that considering an amendment to the OCP based on an actual application rather than just in general terms responds directly to input from the community that was provided back in 2021. At that time, residents who participated in the engagement told the Village that they wanted more information about what would specifically be proposed for land use. They also wanted to see policy that would ensure the proposed plan was implemented within those guidelines. 

That is what the Village has done through this process.

Regarding your questions, the Village has an Evacuation Plan that is updated on an as-needed basis. If this development moves forward, a review and update to the Evacuation Plan would be part of the process when needed. These plans are developed by professionals in emergency management and disaster response. 

It is also worth noting that while there are concerns being raised about evacuations, two routes out of the community are fairly standard and this applies to communities with populations much larger than Anmore. Emergency evacuation using marine services is also a potential option using existing marina and industrial dock facilities on the nearby Burrard Inlet waterfront.

That said, emergency management is a priority for the Village, and considerations such as applying FireSmart principles and having a current Evacuation Plan are always important considerations, and there may be opportunities to incorporate policy in the Neighbourhood Plan to address these priorities.