The purpose of proposed Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 6095-2022-5670(33) is to is to amend Official Community Plan Bylaw 5670-2017 to incorporate the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan as a Reference Plan in the Official Community Plan. The Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan will provide guidance on land use within the Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area.
The Mayor opened the public hearing.
The Project Manager of the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan introduced the proposed amendments to the Official Community Plan to incorporate the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan.
The Corporate Officer stated that four letters in support of the proposal had been received, one of which asking Council to consider using Temporary Use Permit extensions or other policy measures to allow current business uses to continue while waiting for the area to be built out over time.
The Mayor opened the floor to the public for questions and comments.
Candace Koch, Mission, expressed concern regarding how the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan had been presented to the public. She noted that many residents were under the impression that the plan was a development proposal and did not understand that it was a conceptual plan to be referred to during future planning. She further expressed concern in regards to the future of the Mission Raceway Park and noted her concern that constructing residential buildings near the racetrack would lead to its eventual closure due to noise complaints.
Earl Babich, Mission, expressed concern regarding connectivity and accessibility between downtown Mission and the proposed waterfront area. He asked for a map providing the breakdown of publicly and privately owned lands in the Waterfront Comprehensive Area. He stated his desire to see affordable housing constructed near Mission Raceway Park. Mr. Babich questioned the amount of money the City had spent on waterfront planning studies to date.
The Project Manager of the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan provided a breakdown of property ownership and stated that the budget for the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan had been set at $1.5 million.
H. S. Kenny Braich, Mission, provided an overview of the legal structure of the waterfront land owned by the Braich family, the history of the land under Braich ownership, and the family’s plans to develop the lands. He asked about the permitted uses of his land under the current zoning and inquired as to the legal impact of the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan on Braich owned lands.
In response, the Mayor noted that the purpose of the Plan is to provide people with a vision for the land to inform in future development decisions.
H. S. Kenny Braich, stated he was not in support of the plan and asked if his properties could be excluded from the Plan, similar to Mission Raceway Park. He noted that previous efforts to sell his land had been hindered by concerns regarding noise pollution from Mission Raceway Park.
He expressed concern regarding the public amenity space planned for the lands immediately adjacent to the Fraser River in place of container ports for heavy industry. He noted that the highest and best offers he had received for his land were for heavy industrial developments and expressed his desire to see the foreshore corridor preserved. He expressed concern regarding the City’s communications with the Vancouver Port Authority and CP Rail.
Mr. Braich stated his belief that his family had not been treated with the same level of respect as the other waterfront landowners, and that the City had left the family in an untenable position. He questioned the Plan’s success without the cooperation of the Braich family, as owners of a significant portion of the waterfront lands. He noted his desire to do what was in the best interests of Mission residents and expressed his concern that the Plan was not the best use of the land.
Charlotte Lightburn, Mission, expressed concern regarding connectivity between downtown Mission and the waterfront area and pedestrian safety. She further expressed concern in regards to population growth as a result of the proposed residential development in the Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area and the overcrowding already experienced in local schools.
Daniel Preston, real estate agent for the Braich family, noted areas slated for densification in the Official Community Plan and inquired if an absorption rate study had been completed for the City. He asked for the maximum buildout number proposed for the Waterfront Comprehensive Area and expressed concern in regards to a potential decrease in land value due to the number of residential units proposed for the waterfront area. He questioned if the City's industrial land supply would be adequate to support future job growth.
In response, the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer stated that the municipality was expected to grow at an average rate of 1.8% over the next 20 years. It was noted that the plan for the waterfront area included a mix of commercial uses in addition to residential use. The Project Manager for the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan stated that the buildout for the Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area was expected to be approximately 7,500 residential units, in additional to employment and commercial land.
Bobby Braich, Mission, expressed concern in relation to public misinformation regarding the Braich-owned lands on the Mission waterfront. He stated that the family had always planned with Mission’s best interests in mind. He expressed further concern regarding the amount of Braich-owned land to be designated for public amenity use under the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan and the City’s communication with CP Rail with regards to the Plan.
Earl Babich, asked to see a map breaking down the ownership of privately and publicly owned parcels in the Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area. He expressed concern regarding the public’s understanding of the conceptual nature of the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan and stated that the process was disrespectful to current land owners.
Nicholas Kuhl, Planner with O2 Planning + Design, provided a map detailing the lands that were privately and publicly owned within the Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area.
In response to Mr. Babich, the Mayor stated that land use planning exercises are common practice throughout Canada and help identify public land uses. He noted that neighbourhood planning helps identify potential future land uses in order to assist the municipality in projecting the costing for future servicing and amenities.
H. S. Kenny Braich, asked Council to consider deferring third reading of the proposed bylaw, extending the time period of the consultation, and expanding the planning area to include The Junction Shopping Centre.
Daniel Preston, asked if an industrial land supply study had been completed.
The Mayor stated that an industrial land supply study had been completed recently and reported on in the local paper.
Candace Koch, corrected her original statement regarding property ownership.
Bobby Braich, expressed concern regarding public perception of the lands due to the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan in contrast to the current permitted land uses. He requested Council defer third reading of the proposed bylaw in order to provide further opportunity for consultation on the waterfront area. He asked Council and City staff to clarify ownership of parcels in the Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area and the conceptual nature of the Waterfront Revitalization Master Plan.
Hearing no further questions or comments, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing for City of Mission Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 6095-2022-5670(33) closed.