5 May 2025 Council meeting Environment

Request for Reconsideration of Loudon Park Decision

Motion
The following motions were deferred to the next Regular Council meeting for consideration at that time: “That Council direct Staff to increase the budget by $1,876,373 funded from the Special Initiatives Reserve to proceed with the Boat Storage and Club Building from the alternate design for the Loudon Park improvements as outlined in the report titled "Loudon Park Improvements" dated 2025-MAR-19; and That Council direct Staff prepare a concept plan for a washroom, multi-purpose and fitness building on the general area of the existing washroom building.”
Sources

Procedural vote

City vote record

Tyler Brown Yes

I appreciate your comments there. At the same time, I think there's quite a long history of of going to the community on this. We have a viable option that was presented to us. Those numbers are pulled from the staff report and that is to proceed with the the boat storage and club building on the location of the existing boat storage for the secondary consideration there. That is for staff to do the work around concept planning for those other for that washroom for that multipurpose building and general amenity building on the site of the existing washroom. I think that would benefit from actually having something to discuss and I would trust that that would be distributed to the user groups and the neighborhood association for comment as it gets developed. I think arguably there's been a lot of feedback around what should be preserved and that's the large central green space. I think. I don't want to say all the feedback was reasonable because I think rightfully identified. There's been some unfortunate feedback, especially how it's been directed, but at the same time taking taking people from the community in good faith that that they do support development and redevelopment of the site. There's an opportunity there for for compromise from everybody around and I would hope that we could capture on that and see see further development of the park realized in short order. Thank you, Brown. Thanks your Worship, I won't dwell but really it's to the motion is to actually see the user group building started that work starting because they were high level concept plans and they would be need to. The architect would need to take them and they would need to convert them into building plans and the civil work would need to be done and there's timeline there there and so this would be to advance that so that building could be built. The second motion is I think actually what council is wanting unless they're wanting a whole reconceptualization of all the, all the program requirements of the site. But really it's to prepare a concept plan and it leaves it pretty loose general area of the existing washroom building. Because it wouldn't make sense to direct staff to come back with a building on the area that we, you know, clearly are trying to avoid and there's no other area on site. So, you know, there may be emergent opportunity, but I just would argue that's pretty open if you want to take out general area of existing washroom building and just prepare a concept plan for a washroom, multipurpose and fitness building, or not really like if you don't want to do that at all. I've heard people say, and I took their comments on good faith, that they're open to exploring an alternative solution that provides for everybody. If that's not the case, then again, just defeat it. But getting into the scenario where absolutely nothing will happen, I was really hoping to avoid that and try to find compromise. And I hope I won't regret the reconsideration, but I just might.

Hilary Eastmure Yes

Councillor Eastman, Councillor Gesselbrook, thank you. I really appreciate the reconsideration opportunity because I think that we can find a really good compromise that, that meets everyone's needs. And that is essentially why I supported option B, because I thought it represented the best compromise in terms of providing the two critically needed pieces which were the safe boat storage as well as the updated washroom building, which I think is really what serves the users of the park. Because it's not just the rowing club and the canoe and Kayak Club, it's also the, the general public that accesses that park and deserves access to universal accessible washrooms. And so that's why I thought option B was really our best route. So with this alternate motion, yes, it gets us to doing something as quickly as possible on the safe boat storage, which I've supported all along. But I am a little bit disappointed, pointed that we're then pushing out the washrooms and by including a multi purpose and fitness building that is going to, you know, make that the cost significant for that second phase of that project. But essentially all along council has been very supportive of the need for safe, secure boat storage. And hearing from the community, there obviously is a desire for some more amenity space. And I think I. And so for that reason I think that this represents a good compromise and allows us to move ahead with the critically needed storage piece and then take a bit more time to really get it right as far as the siting of an amenity space space and public washrooms that preserves the much loved green space in this park.

Leonard Krog Yes

Nobody else was on the list, so I'm jumping right in. I said some time ago, about a half hour ago that this was not the time to have this kind of discussion. If we simply defeated this motion or alternatively gave everybody a chance to think about it over the next couple of weeks and do some research, we'd be better off than doing what we're trying to do now. With great respect, if we vote it down. The problem is that may be the motion that this council will support if we vote it down. Well, with great respect, I rec. And I'm going to be a bit, bit cranky here. I did suggest some time ago that we not debate or put a new motion forward whatsoever. And I see some in the audience nodding. So at least I've got someone listening to me tonight that we not put any motion in front of this council, that we give everybody a couple of weeks to cool off, to let the community see, settle down, to let us hear information and then come forward with a motion that, as I said, would hopefully bring us to some kind of consensus and community support around this. We've got folks in the audience I know who are ticked because they don't want to spend the money, period, or any substantive sum close to it. We've got others who want to. Who want the first class model, which I still support. We've got others who want some kind of a compromise. We've. But others who are interested only in whether the trees get cut or don't get cut. So with Respect. If the motion is withdrawn, we can leave it off the agenda. You can take a couple of weeks to think about it.