39-storey towers sent to public hearing (again) by Port Moody council, with a few added asks of developer

Port Moody council voted to send PCI Development’s twin 39-story towers to public hearing for a second time, after a more robust debate between city councillors took place on Friday.

Council had initially approved the first two readings of the application by a vote of 5-1, the drafting of a terms sheet, and advancing the project to public hearing last Tuesday, but the topic was re-visited on Oct. 25 after the integrity of the vote was called into question.

On Tuesday, Coun. Amy Lubik said she was not ready to send the project to public hearing, and had called for separation, but the meeting was adjourned before her motion was discussed.

She added several amendments at Friday’s meeting, asking the developer to consider adding more affordable units, increasing the number of family friendly units, incorporating more green space and natural play areas, as well as interesting and green architecture.

Lubik clarified these amendments were requests, not requirements, and should not delay a public hearing date. All were approved.

While generally supportive of the project, Lubik said she thought the city should ask for more due to the project’s sheer size and density.

“It’s important to still try to work for more (affordable) rental in a project of this size,” Lubik said.  “So that we can really say to the public, ‘This is why we changed the official community plan.’”

PCI’s 125,000 square foot rental project is the first application submitted for the city’s Moody Centre Transit Oriented Development (TOD) area. The proposal includes 865 rental units, with five percent (44) offered at below market rates.

The city’s inclusionary zoning policy – which requires 15 percent of units be affordable – does not apply to purpose-built rental buildings, but following early input, council recognized it needs to be revised for higher density projects.

Lubik said the city could still negotiate to decrease parking, bring on affordable housing partners, or ask for affordable artist residencies.

“When we developed that policy, we weren’t we weren’t thinking about projects this size,” Lubik said. “I always say density can be done well, and that’s up to us.”

The only votes against some of Lubik’s the amendments came from Couns. Kyla Knowles and Callan Morrison, who opposed asking for architectural changes due to the vague wording of the request.

While Knowles supported the remaining amendments, she cautioned against adding more costs which she said would just be downloaded onto the rental price of the units.

She noted that the policy meets the city’s family friendly units policy, its inclusionary zoning policy, and the current site lacks any greenspace at all.

“I think we need to be a little bit realistic,” Knowles said. “There is room and space for us to talk about these further after the public hearing.”

Coun. Diana Dilworth voted in favour of the amendments, but initially stated she was opposed and wanted to hear from the public first.

“That doesn’t mean I don’t support these bullets, but as with any major development application that comes forward to the city, these are conversations that take place at the beginning,” she said. “I feel strongly about getting this to a public hearing.”

Dilworth noted public engagement for the project is split between support and opposition, and said she wants to formalize the conversation in council chambers.

She said large development projects like Suter Brook Village and Newport Village ended up looking very different than their initial applications.

Morrison agreed, stating he wanted to better understand why some residents are against growth and density near transit areas.

“This is the place to put development, in my opinion,” he said. “What is the true reason behind being against it?”

Coun. Haven Lurbiecki had a few issues with the project, including the speed at which it was being advanced to public hearing.

On Tuesday, Lurbiecki refused to extend the meeting, stating she wanted to defer discussion to the next meeting, arguing the agenda was too full and proper time needed to be allocated due to the project’s importance.

At Friday’s meeting, she voted against adopting the agenda, re-issuing her complaints about the timing, arguing council had been in budget deliberations all day.

Lurbiecki then attacked Knowles and Dilworth’s comments that more negotiation could take place after the public hearing, stating first and second reading is when city councils typically request changes.

“After public hearing, it would be either rejecting or accepting this application,” she said. “This is the time we negotiate.”

Lurbiecki proposed an amendment to require at least 15 percent of units be offered at affordable rates, stating council has already acknowledged the policy is not working for the project.

She noted PCI’s application is the largest and most dense ever submitted to the city, adding the 44 percent parking reduction should have resulted in more affordable housing.

“There is no doubt the community has serious and valid concerns about these towers,” Lurbiecki said. “We need to make sure we get every single last thing we can out of these towers.”

Her colleagues were not supportive of the amendment.

Lubik said she did not think 15 percent was a realistic ask, while Mayor Meghan Lahti and Knowles said it would be considered negotiating in “bad faith” because the project meets or exceeds the city’s current policies.

“I would love to see more affordable housing too,” Lahti said. “But you can’t go in and start demanding this at the 11th hour and . . . pull the rug out.”

Lurbiecki proposed a second amendment for a more equitable distribution of one to three-bedroom units, in alignment with Port Moody’s Housing Needs Report.

She argued Port Moody is overbuilding small units over family friends units, citing provincial housing target data showing it already has 3,492 studio and one-bedroom units at various stages of approval.

No other councillor seconded her motion.

A final amendment introduced by Lurbiecki, requesting public hearing notices be sent to every property in Port Moody, was approved unanimously.