POSTPONED: Public lands debate heading to public hearing March 27, 2018

POSTPONED: Public lands debate heading to public hearing March 27, 2018

Update: The public hearing has been postponed for a 2nd time, date to be determined.

Future of city property going to public hearing
Tri-City News, Feb. 15, 2018

Notes in addition to Tri-City News summary above; for best context and complete information, listen/view the archived video of the meeting (link below).

Hot-button issue. Complicated proposal. Widespread confusion.

At the Feb. 13th council meeting, Mayor Clay and a few others once again felt there was a lot of confusion and misrepresentation within public comment.

Those voting in favour (4:3) to pass first readings to move this forward to a public hearing (March 27, 2018) said they want to hear from a wider audience, suggesting most of the recent feedback came from residents in very close proximity to the site of the former fire hall and current public works yard in the Inlet Centre area adjacent to city hall (e.g., Suterbrook, Newport).

There is no doubt some confusion, understandable given the scope of this proposal, and the lack of specifics available to the public. As noted earlier, the proposal involves OCP and zoning amendments to change this land from P1 (public and institutional) to comprehensive development, mixed use (CD) in order to facilitate the sale of the land.

The city gives examples of potential community amenity benefits, but at this stage there are no guarantees; it’s a matter of what might be negotiated (or not) with any future, private owner of the land should the city proposal move forward.

Public discontent with the ‘consultation’ process was very evident in the two recent meetings (CPAC and the regular council meeting, Feb. 6th and 13th, respectively, see earlier posts on public lands below for more information; scroll or use search bar).

Several people gave public input at the Feb. 13th council meeting. Recent by-election candidate Gerry Kent said selling public lands is not a sustainable strategy, and that proposed or approved new developments, as well as partnerships with other levels of government, should help provide funds to assist with city needs. Another recent by-election candidate, Richard Biedka, commented that a longer-term perspective with more information and analysis is necessary.

Most speakers, but not all, did not approve of the proposed amendments for this public land.

One speaker (in this case, in favour of the city’s proposal, and a community member of CPAC) claimed propaganda material was produced by some residents not in favour. The material in question was a mock-up visual image of two tall towers on the sites and comments about additional towers (available from CPAC on-table materials). This speaker said there was no way 3-4 towers could be accommodated on this public land, and that he had seen nothing in the city material about 3-4 towers, therefore these other resident comments amounted to propaganda (he quoted a definition from Merriam-Webster online).

He may be correct in thinking 3-4 towers is unrealistic. However, written city material did indicate the possibility of 3-4 towers and several lower-rise buildings (Dec. 4, 2017 info meeting display boards here; see also previous post: Public lands for sale, update post info session of Dec. 4, 2017). Ironically, this speaker’s intended correction amounted to (presumably unintentional) propaganda. More confusion.

Other comments and questions included disappointment with what was perceived as an unwillingness to listen, and condescending, dismissive comments, that public land should be retained for public needs, the issue of expanding the TOD circle to include an irregular bump with the lands under discussion, a question on why the city decided these lands should be up for discussion, that this was not a decision to be taken lightly, listen to the people, Flavelle site mentioned as an area that might be worth consideration of trade-offs, the need for more details on longer-term vision, including financials, of Port Moody and its needs before embarking on this type of action on public land.

One of the final speakers, a local realtor who stated he recently moved from the Inlet Centre area to Coquitlam, re-iterated the inaccurate claim that Port Moody has an obligation for greater density due to Skytrain.

Many questions.

Tower heights uncertainty
Councillor Lahti noted several discrepancies in city material that required clean-up for clarity. She also suggested the 26-34 storey descriptions be amended to just say 26 storeys, with an asterisk on the maps to indicate room for negotiation. This motion passed, but with some concerns that no cap on height/storeys could lead to “higher” developer expectations.

Onni connection, more uncertainty
Councillor Madsen brought up the Onni matter that surfaced at the week-earlier CPAC meeting (i.e., a statement that the city must relocate the public works yard due to an agreement with Onni), indicating this new information is relevant to the discussion of the sale of the works yard, and wondered if it was more of an attempt to skew the conversation than an actual legal obligation. (Councillor Lahti recalled a mutual agreement many years ago involving taking money from Onni and eventual relocation of the works yard.)

The city is still looking for evidence of a legal obligation to Onni to relocate the public works yard. (See post CPAC update (Feb. 6, 2018) — Obligation to Onni to relocate public works yard?).

Purchase other land, Flavelle?
Mayor Clay suggested sale of this land could empower the city to buy other land. “I was so glad to see a couple of people come down tonight and say, what if we did sell that land, maybe we could buy lots of parkland somewhere else like maybe even Flavelle … If you could sell this 6 acres and buy 50 acres, is that a good deal?”

While many people might think a trade-off for some or all Flavelle land may be worthy of discussion, how realistic is it? How would it work? Is it really a viable option?

Just over one week earlier, the mayor was promoting the merits of the large-scale Flavelle proposal which includes up to 7,000 new residents in multiple towers, see Updated – Flavelle proposal passes first regional hurdle, Tri-City News, Feb. 2, 2018. More confusion.

Postpone decision until civic election coming in October 2018, or later
There were suggestions any decision should be delayed, pending the civic election results, possibly with a referendum question. It was also suggested by Councillor Vagramov that if an OCP review is pending for 2019 the matter could/should wait until then.

Final vote: 4:3.
For first readings: Mayor Clay, Councillors Dilworth, Junker, Lahti.
Against: Councillors Madsen, Royer, Vagramov.

There is much more discussion of interest not captured above, available on the archived video, link here. Select whichever items are of particular interest. In the case of public lands, interested parties will want to listen to the public input segments, and item 9.1.

Letters: ‘Higher purpose’ for Port Moody land
Tri-City News, Feb. 16, 2018

In other news, a sampling:
Shuttle bus gets green light from PoMo council
Tri-City News, Feb. 16, 2018

PoMo considering ban on plastic bags, styrofoam
Tri-City News, Feb. 15, 2018

Port Moody police warn of phone scam
Tri-City News, Feb. 15, 2018


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Site preparation, Marcon property, St George Street (3000 block)

Site preparation, Marcon property, St George Street (3000 block)

Site preparation, chainsaw action, week ending Feb. 16, 2018

One lot above, south side, roughly middle of the land assembly, was not sold as part of this development. 6-storey condo buildings are planned for the north side of St. George with parkade entrance via St. Andrews Street (lane).

Community Information Meeting, 252 new residential units on St. George Street east of Williams (Marcon), from June 2017
Public hearing, Marcon St. George St. OCP and zoning amendments (Oct. 2017)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Council agenda, Feb. 13, 2018 — public lands, plastic, conservation, seniors, rezoning, city shuttle service, and more

Council agenda, Feb. 13, 2018 — public lands, plastic, conservation, seniors, rezoning, city shuttle service, and more

Wide range of items, full 632 page information package is available here or here. Note the sale of public lands item forwarded from the Feb. 6, 2018 CPAC meeting. (See post CPAC update (Feb. 6, 2018) — Obligation to Onni to relocate public works yard? for more information.)

Public input is allowed near the beginning and at the end of the meeting. Written correspondence is no longer included in minutes for reasons unknown.

In the News, a sampling

Port Moody real estate development on fire
Vancouver Courier, Feb. 5, 2018

PoMo land proposal going back to council with CPAC assent
Tri-City News, Feb. 8, 2018

Updated – Flavelle proposal passes first regional hurdle
Tri-City News, dated Feb. 2, 2018, but changed from original.

Beavers an education for residents, city
Tri-City News, Feb. 6, 2018


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CPAC update (Feb. 6, 2018) — Obligation to Onni to relocate public works yard?

CPAC update (Feb. 6, 2018) — Obligation to Onni to relocate public works yard?

Is the City of Port Moody legally obligated to Onni to relocate the public works yard? See below for more.

CPAC meeting summary, see also recent post below: Tidal Wave (with CPAC links).

On-table material is now available on city website (121 pages includes presentations and community feedback), direct link here.

The meeting was long, beginning at 7:00 pm, and ending after 10:30 pm. The first item, Centro Development proposal for 50 Electronic Avenue, took a little over an hour, with the remainder on the subject of public lands. Worth viewing if time allows: Council meeting video recordings (select “specialty” tab).
Centro Development, 50 Electronic Ave.
Four written submissions (plus one for public lands that includes comment on Centro), several speakers. See links above for submissions and video.

Received mostly in positive light by committee, will be on an upcoming council agenda, date not yet known.

Public lands: works yard and former fire hall sites
Many speakers (about 20, minutes not yet available), with all but 3 voicing opposition to this proposal. 2017 by-election candidate Gerry Kent spoke in opposition.
Written input (50+): all but one person voicing opposition.
Many views expressed, common theme (residents) was to keep public lands public.

The land is currently zoned P1 (Public and Institutional); the city proposal is to change this to comprehensive development (CD), with paired OCP amendments. This would enable the city to market the land for sale to prospective developers. The city has already asked for expressions of interest (December 2016), and strong interest has been confirmed. Mayor Clay indicated he has seen some beautiful concept drawings.

Chair Barbara Junker noted at the beginning of the meeting that regardless of voting outcome this item would be forwarded to regular council. It seems any developer can ask for an item to be forwarded even if it’s received negatively by the committee. Most developers wouldn’t ask for that; instead they would make changes and try again at the committee level before proceeding further.

For example, the Aragon (Platform) proposal presented the first time on Nov. 3, 2015, and rejected by the committee, was not immediately forwarded to council, but came back to CPAC at a later date with hopes for a better outcome. In the case of public lands, the city presents the proposal as both “developer” and city, making it an unusual situation. Therefore, the city can, and did, decide to forward the item to council regardless of the vote.

Chair Barbara Junker reminded committee members and residents to stay on topic, namely that the discussion was about land use with OCP and zoning amendments, not sale of the land. Confusing, since it’s all very abstract at this point, and land use changes appear to depend on selling the land to the selected bidder(s) once rezoning and OCP amendments are achieved.

Highest and Best Use
In the opening presentation, the term Highest and Best Use was described only in terms of economic value, omitting the full definition. On July 14, 2015, council passed a motion defining Highest and Best Use, as follows:

“That any vacant or underdeveloped publicly owned property in the City of Port Moody be designated for highest and best use, and that only if this is deemed not possible a lower use be considered on a case by case basis, and that the city defines the term highest and best use as the reasonably probable, possible and legal use of property that is physically possible, properly funded, and financially feasible and that provides the opportunity to address community needs for infrastructure and services and results in the highest value (including but not limited to social, financial, environmental, cultural, historical, and/or quality-of-life value) for residents, and that staff be directed to draft a corporate policy on designating highest and best use for all city-owned property for council consideration.”

Required relocation of public works yard, relating to Onni (Suterbrook) — Conundrum 2
As noted above, the meeting took just over 3-1/2 hours. Just before the 3-hour mark (about 175 minutes into the video), Councillor Dilworth made some comments, including: “… lot of misunderstanding … many people don’t understand the city has a legal requirement to relocate the works yard, and that was negotiated as part of the Suterbrook development. The city has to do that.”

This statement is troubling for a few reasons.

  • This “legal requirement” to Onni was not part of the consultation information provided to the public.
  • The City has been unable to provide documentation to validate the claim, except for a Land Use Committee agenda from July 2, 2008 that does not mention a legal obligation to Onni to move the public works yard. The document does note contributions for relocation of the works yard and Inlet Centre facilities (increase to just over $1.3M, and ~$440K, respectively) “to reflect additional residential units” (page 4 of document, link here).
  • If there is a contractual agreement between the city and Onni to relocate the works yard, it should have been part of the conversation.
  • If there is a contractual agreement, what is the purpose? Is Onni interested in the property?
  • Why would there be an agreement with a developer about public land without public consultation?
  • Or, maybe there is no agreement, in which case the statement made at the meeting was wrong.

Final CPAC vote
In favour (7) — Mayor Clay, Councillors Dilworth, Junker, Lahti; community members Dan Attridge, Wilhelmina Martin, Jeff McLellan
Not in favour (5) — Councillors Madsen, Royer, Vagramov; community members Chris Staddon, Svetlana Evoy

Not wasting any time, and before CPAC minutes are completed, the public lands matter is now on the regular council agenda for Feb. 13, 2018:

“The application was considered by the Community Planning Advisory Committee (CPAC) on February 6, 2018 and the following motion was passed:

Moved, seconded, and CARRIED
THAT the Official Community Plan Amendment and rezoning application be supported as recommended in the report dated January 30, 2018 from Planning and Development Department – Planning Division regarding Official Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application – Former Fire Hall and Current Works Yard Sites (200 loco Road and 3250 Murray Street).”

Public input is allowed at all regular council meetings.

The Moody Centre Community Association (MCCA) welcomes your comments.


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bold Properties, site preparation

Bold Properties, site preparation

Demolition completed.

Before, from Google

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tidal wave?

Tidal wave?


Awhile back, we pondered whether development in Port Moody was a slow wave or a coming tsunami: Moody Centre development: a slow wave … or tsunami?

The answer is becoming clearer for Moody Centre and beyond, though its still difficult to confirm precise numbers since many projects are still conceptual. However, based on estimates, if all or most projects went ahead, it appears Port Moody will overshoot its population growth projections dramatically.

So far, we know of (proposed or approved):

  • Flavelle, 15 buildings ranging in height from 4 to 38 storeys, for a total of more than 300 storeys altogether, with possibly 7,000 additional residents, see Tri-City News link below
  • Andres, several buildings 6-storeys and under, three buildings ranging from 12-31 storeys, residential and other uses
  • Moody Centre TOD, buildings up to 26 storeys (no guaranteed cap on height or number of buildings), population estimate is about 3,400
  • Coronation Park TOD, rezoning for towers approved in principle, population increase could be very significant, no formal application yet known
  • Public lands at Inlet Centre, if approved, possibly 3 to 4 towers up to 34 storeys, and 1 to 3 low rise (4 – 6 storey) buildings, still requires approval and conceptual development, see CPAC and Tri-City News link below
  • Suterbrook, additional recent tower request by Onni, resulting in two new towers, one low-rise, 483 units
  • Berezan Group, 3 residential towers of 20, 24, and 26 storeys, with a total of 601 units, including 84 rental units, see Tri-City News link below
  • Ioco lands (Brilliant Circle Group), not much known except it is a large site
  • Aragon’s Platform, 86 condos, 6-storeys, plus 12 stacked townhomes (Moody/Clarke behind “The Station” which was public land about a decade ago)
  • Woodbridge, 6-story apartment building, 142 rental units, St. Johns/Moray
  • Electronic Avenue (Centro Development), two 6-storey buildings, 358 units, see CPAC and Tri-City News link below
  • Marcon, two 6-storey condos and townhouse units (252 total) on 3000 block St. George)
  • Townline, The Strand (2513 Clarke St., long-known as PoMo Legion), 5-storeys, 84 units
  • Bold, 38 townhouse units in “Westport” (Clarke/Douglas/St. Johns)
  • PC Urban Properties, 230 rental apartments, Dewdney Trunk Road (currently mobile home park), see Tri-City News link below
  • St. Andrews United Church, 2318 St. Johns, non-profit partnership, 55 affordable units
  • Burrard Public House, St. Johns, in planning stages to develop 6-storeys on adjacent lot, Kyle/Clarke Streets
  • Landcastle Developments, Albert/St. Johns, 2 buildings, 24 and 3-storeys, under review
  • Subdivision potential for large lots (quite a few applications underway)
  • Land assemblies taking place in Moody Centre and elsewhere, not yet at public stage
  • Smaller projects not included in this list and/or stalled (e.g., Lots 17-20 Henry Street near Moody Middle, multi-storey, tiered building backing into the Chines hillside)
  • More information at Port Moody Development Applications (spreadsheet)

Much of the above residential development is either where none currently exists, or replacing current homes with much higher density.

Factual Information Campaign
The City of Port Moody is planning a Factual Information Campaign to inform residents and other stakeholders about planning and growth. Maybe this will shed more light on the subject. See Tri-City News story, link below.

Budget consultation, Jan. 30, 2018
It’s not clear how, or if, aggressive development benefits residents and city coffers.  The annual debt charts suggest it hasn’t, but there may be many variables.

A resident at the budget consultation posed an interesting question about whether population growth can keep taxes lower or more stable, since the city materials provided indicated that more residents require more services. The city was unable to provide a concrete answer as to whether aggressive residential growth is a bottom line benefit. It would be helpful to know, including the trade-off when industrial or other employment related zoning is re-zoned for residential.

The top financial officer also confirmed, in answer to a related question, that the city’s planned growth numbers are not dictated by the Metro Vancouver regional district. We hear the word “required” frequently, but that word is inaccurate. Of course, Port Moody needs to work co-operatively with the regional district and this includes providing population estimates and much more to the district for planning purposes.

More information and meeting video at city webpage 2018 Budget Consultation, includes online feedback form to be completed by Feb. 15. See also earlier post: Port Moody finances and taxes, 2018.)

At the last regular council meeting, the motion to bypass the CPAC review in the matter of sale of public lands was defeated 4:3 (Dilworth, Madsen, Royer, Vagramov). Councillor Dilworth (who agreed to skip the review for Coronation Park and Moody Centre TOD zoning and OCP amendments) said the city needs transparency. We agree. It’s not clear why Coronation Park and Moody Centre didn’t get the same treatment, other than a comment that public lands are owned by the city. (And let’s be clear, city lands are owned by the public, not the current council.)

The Community Planning Advisory Committee (CPAC) will meet on Tuesday, Feb. 6 starting at 7:00 pm, city hall, and the agenda, link here, includes:

  • 50 Electronic Avenue rezoning application for a mixed-use project that includes 358 residential units and approximately 1,565m² (16,845ft²) of commercial space
  • a review of the city’s plan to sell the public works site and former fire hall site (public lands), see Tri-City News story, link below, and the most recent post on this site: Public land for sale — January 2018 update.
  • Any person wishing to comment can do so in-person at the meeting or in writing by noon on the day of the meeting (
  • Based on precedent, and the fact that council members exceed community members in numbers on CPAC, it would be surprising if a majority of the committee rejected sending these matters to regular council.

Recent Tri-City News links with beginning excerpts, click on article titles for full stories:

Flavelle proposal passes first regional hurdle, Feb. 2, 2018
A new waterfront neighbourhood in Port Moody is a step closer to being realized.

Metro Vancouver’s regional planning committee on Friday voted 8-3 to support Port Moody’s proposal to re-designate the 12.7 hectare site adjacent to Rocky Point Park, where the Flavelle sawmill and a small parcel of municipal property now stand, from industrial to general urban use.

PoMo wants to inform residents about growth, Feb. 1, 2018
The city of Port Moody will spend $3,100 on an information campaign about the city’s growth and development, once it figures out where the money will come from.

But two councillors caution such a campaign could be fraught with political overtones, especially in an election year.

Issues with gov’t? Talk to the ombuds, Feb. 1, 2018
If you believe you’ve been treated unfairly by a local or provincial government body, the B.C.’s ombudsperson wants to hear from you.

Another rental building proposed for PoMo, Feb. 1, 2018
Another 230 rental apartments could be coming to Port Moody.

The latest project is being proposed for 3370 Dewdney Trunk Rd. by PC Urban Properties Corp., which presented its plans to the city’s advisory design panel Jan. 17. A mobile home park with 17 pads currently occupies the site. The developer acquired the property last August.

Port Moody to develop beaver management plan, Jan. 31, 2018
The city of Port Moody will develop a beaver management plan after the death last December of a beaver kit during efforts to relocate its family from a storm sewer pipe in Pigeon Creek.

Future of PoMo properties will need more consultation, Jan. 31, 2018
More public consultation will be needed before Port Moody council decides what is to become of former fire hall site and the public works yard nearby.

At last Tuesday’s meeting, council narrowly defeated a motion to send a proposal to amend the city’s official community plan and zoning for the two properties directly to a public hearing on March 13. Instead, the plan will be referred to the community planning advisory committee (CPAC) for further review.

Letter: Latest Suter Brook plan would be big, Jan. 24, 2018
The Editor, Re. “Port Moody needs a density discussion” (Letters, The Tri-City News, Jan. 17).

First towers proposed for St. Johns Street, Jan. 23, 2018
Port Moody residents will get their first look on Jan. 31 at a mixed-use development proposed for the 3200-block of St. Johns Street.
The Berezan Group, a Langley-based developer, is holding a community information meeting in the Inlet Theatre Galleria from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., with a formal presentation at 7 p.m.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Council agenda for January 23, 2018, includes taxes, public lands, zoning bylaw, more

Council agenda for January 23, 2018, includes taxes, public lands, zoning bylaw, more


The agenda package is 490 pages in total, available from the city website here or here. Please note the information below is limited, and for full context MCCA encourages review of items in their entirety from the city links provided.

  • 2018 Draft Financial Plan

    (consent agenda)
    Recommendations from the Finance Committee meeting held on Tuesday, January 16, 2018. This item is on the “consent agenda” meaning it will be discussed if a member of council asks. There are a number of items listed. The final item on the list is:
    “FC18/015 — THAT a draft proposed tax rate increase of 4.6% be presented at the Public Budget Consultation Town Hall meeting on January 30, 2018.” More information should be available at the upcoming town hall. Note, this is just over one week away. For additional information including historical, see separate post Port Moody finances and taxes, 2018, council agenda January 23rd

  • Tri-Cities Healthier Communities Partnership Revised Terms of Reference (15 pages)

  • Proposed Factual Information Communication Campaign Costs (Pages 45-48)

  • City Events Update (Pages 49-54)

  • Woodbridge development (6-storey residential rental building, 3131-3137 St. Johns Street), final reading and adoption.

  • Release of Restrictive Covenants (Aragon development land, Clarke St.). Covenants registered in 1995, 2002, 2005, now redundant (e.g., Appleyard House now relocated).

  • Rezoning Application – Small Lot Subdivision, 2707 St. George Street. A single-family home will be demolished and replaced with two new homes. Recommendation: Public Hearing to be held on Tuesday, February 13, 2018.

  • Working Draft – Zoning Bylaw, 2018. Recommendation: the draft be received for information. This item has been delayed for many years. Almost 200 pages (of 490) in the council agenda package (links above). This is an extremely important document as it guides development and land use, and is a partner document to the Official Community Plan (OCP) but more specific. As this is a working draft, more consultation and time will be necessary before completion. For more information, see city material and separate post Working Draft – Zoning Bylaw, 2018, January 23 council agenda.

  • Glenayre Neighbourhood RS1 Zoning Review – Follow-up on Council Resolution

  • [Sale of] Public lands: Former Fire Hall and Current Works Yard Sites – Official Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning. Pages 353-414 in agenda (links above). Yet again, a recommendation to waive the requirement for review by the Community Planning Advisory Committee (CPAC). See Council ditches pesky council-approved procedures: Moody Centre TOD (Coronation Park is another example). Recommendation to send to a Public Hearing to be held on March 13, 2018. Agenda information includes feedback received from December 4, 2017 info session. For more information, see city material and separate post Public land for sale — January 2018 update, council agenda January 23rd.

  • Beaver Management Plan (6 pages). Recommendation: “That staff be directed to develop a Beaver Management Plan that promotes coexistence, outlines best management practices, and implements strategies that use alternatives to extermination and/or relocation wherever possible as recommended in the report dated January 11, 2018 from Councillor Meghan Lahti regarding Beaver Management Plan.” … “In December, there was a decision made to remove the beavers from the city infrastructure and unfortunately, one of the young beavers was killed accidently during this process. This unfortunate accident has caused a great deal of anguish in the community and there is a feeling of distrust amongst residents towards the City and staff. While this was a terrible accident, it is clear that things could have and should have been done differently. It is important to move forward from this incident with a shared understanding of how the City will address beavers in the future. Without a Beaver Management Plan, there is no guarantee that this type of accident will not happen again.”

  • Gatensbury Road Improvements – Next Steps (5 pages). Gatensbury Road in Moody Centre (up the hill to Coquitlam) is steep, narrow, and has had increases in traffic and accidents. “Improvements for Gatensbury Road are planned as part of the 2018 Financial Plan. The scope of work includes full reconstruction of Gatensbury Road, renewal of underground utilities, installation of traffic safety measures, and the provision of pedestrian/cycling infrastructure.”

  • UBCM 2018 Emergency Operations Centre Grant (Pages 435-446). “UBCM has announced the availability of grant funding to municipalities for emergency operations centres (EOC) and training. Grant funding is intended to support the purchase of equipment and supplies required to maintain or improve EOCs and to enhance EOC capacity through training and exercises.”

  • No-Fee Business Licence for First Year of Secondary Suite (Pages 447-452)

News links, Tri-City News:
Letter: Port Moody needs a density discussion, Jan. 16, 2018
Anmore Green must submit septic plan by Friday, Jan. 18, 2018 (septic field not in Port Moody, but adjacent and potentially affecting PoMo land, including schools)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment