Summary#

On October 14, 2026, the Infrastructure and Planning Committee carried a recommendation about the Growth Application in the Belvedere Area Structure Plan, in Ward 9. It recommends that Council approve the application and direct City staff to plan for operating funding; Council’s decision is still the next step.

• The committee voted 7 to 2 to recommend approval. Councillors Atkinson and Schmidt voted against.
• If Council approves, the recommendation would direct City staff to include required operating funding in the 2028 adjustments to the 2027–2030 Business Plans and Budgets.
• It would also direct City staff to consider any needed capital or operating investments for 2031 onward when prioritizing future budgets. It does not guarantee those investments.

What it means for you#

• People in Belvedere and Ward 9: The materials do not describe what growth the application involves, so its practical effects on the area are not clear.
• Taxpayers: If Council approves, the recommendation would require City staff to plan for required operating funding. The amount is not stated.
• City Council: It must still decide whether to approve the committee’s recommendation.

Money#

The recommendation calls for operating funding to be included in future budget adjustments, but gives no amount.

• Any 2031-or-later capital or operating investments would be considered through future budget priorities; they are not approved or guaranteed here.

What is unclear#

• What growth or specific projects the application covers.
• How much operating funding may be required, and what it would pay for.
• Whether Council will approve the recommendation.
• What future capital or operating investments may be needed.
• One member of the public spoke, but the minutes provided do not say what they said.

Case for#

• A possible argument for the recommendation is that approving the application while planning for operating costs could help support growth in the Belvedere area. The supplied minutes do not give the committee’s reasons.

Case against#

• The recommendation does not state the cost of operating funding or possible later investments, making their budget impact hard to assess.
• Future investments would be considered through later budget priorities, so the recommendation does not ensure they will be funded.
• Councillors Atkinson and Schmidt voted against, but the supplied minutes do not give their reasons.