Port Moody shouldn’t get ‘overly involved in Anmore business,’ says village councillor

A letter from Port Moody council asking for more time to weigh in on the village’s Anmore South proposal received a mixed reaction Tuesday evening.

Port Moody shouldn’t be “at the table” while Anmore crafts while development plans are made in Anmore, according to village Coun. Kim Trowbridge.

“They seem to be getting overly involved in Anmore business,” Trowbridge said.

The proposal, which consists of approximately 1,900 and 2,200 new housing units, could affect traffic, firefighting, and stormwater management in Port Moody, according to a recent city staff report.

Technical reports on the developments are scheduled to be available at the end of March, which is after the original deadline for Port Moody to offers its comments. Based on that discrepancy, Port Moody council voted unanimously to ask for an extra 60 days to review the reports and craft a response.

It’s a reasonable request, according to Anmore Coun. Doug Richardson.

“We’ve told them one thing in the letter, and we’ve actually failed to deliver,” Richardson said.

Noting traffic impacts and the importance of being a good neighbour, Richardson suggested Anmore grant Port Moody a 60-day extension to offer comments based on the date the technical documents are available.

No one on Anmore council seconded Richardson’s motion.

A total of 2,200 units is “relatively low” when compared to some recent developments in Port Moody, commented Anmore Mayor John McEwen.

Noting impacts on Belcarra Regional Park and Buntzen Lake, McEwen added that he wanted to hear more about how Port Moody is planning to address: “the increased traffic generated by new developments within the City of Port Moody that will affect our local community.”

While McEwen said he welcomed input, he added that the input must be received by the village’s deadlines.

Pending a community survey and committee meetings, Anmore is planning to host an open house on the development proposal at the end of April.

A public hearing and vote are tentatively scheduled for the end of May.

The only note of dissent on council came from Richardson, who decried the compressed timeline.

“I’m appalled by this discussion,” he said. “We’re going to potentially change Anmore forever and we’re going to give residents one shot to talk to people and three weeks time for reports they haven’t even seen yet? It’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve heard in like forever,” he said.

Richardson also said the community survey needed to ask one key question: “We have to ask the residents: do you want this at all?”

The rest of council disagreed.

“I think we’re way beyond asking the question: do you want this or not? That’s been litigated multiple times for multiple years,” Trowbridge said.

Council voted to approve the timeline with Richardson opposed.