AI should make City Hall easier to deal with, not more distant.

A large amount of municipal work involves repetitive administrative tasks: checking whether an application is complete, finding the right bylaw section, routing files between departments, answering routine questions, comparing submissions against standard requirements and preparing internal documentation.

Those are exactly the kinds of tasks where AI and automation can help.

Permit technology is already moving in this direction. New systems can help applicants identify requirements before they submit, flag missing information, check routine zoning or building-code issues and give staff a more complete file to review. That can reduce unnecessary back-and-forth and allow professional staff to focus on the parts of an application that actually require judgment.

I also want AI used behind the scenes to improve City workflows: summarizing routine material, organizing records, tracking deadlines, identifying bottlenecks and helping departments share information more effectively.

The objective is not to replace planners, inspectors or front-counter staff. It is to take mundane work off their desks so they can spend more time working with people.

Any system that helps make or support a decision affecting a resident or business should still have clear human accountability, an audit trail and appropriate privacy protections. The federal government’s current automated-decision guidance similarly treats AI-assisted administrative decisions as requiring governance even when a human makes the final decision.

Use machines for the repetitive work. Use people for judgment, problem-solving and public service.

Businesses should not have to burn through working capital waiting for routine City decisions.

I would establish published service standards, including one week for business licences and five business days for straightforward small-project permits. Applicants should know at the beginning what information is required, who is responsible for the file and when they should expect a decision.

Where one business is replacing another with substantially the same approved use, such as a restaurant replacing a restaurant, existing approvals and infrastructure should be recognized wherever they remain valid rather than automatically restarting every part of the process.

The City should also track delays that are within its control and publish its performance against these standards. If an application cannot meet the target, the applicant should be told why and given a revised timeline.

The objective is not to weaken safety, building or health requirements. It is to make City Hall predictable, coordinated and accountable.

Economic growth should mean more than attracting new development. It should mean helping existing businesses survive, making it easier for entrepreneurs to open and expand, retaining employment in the City, and using our limited commercial and industrial land intelligently.

City decisions about parking, curb access, construction, public space, fees and transportation can have real consequences for nearby businesses. Those effects should be considered before changes are made and measured afterward.

North Vancouver also has economic strengths worth building on. The City already has marine and industrial businesses, a significant film and creative-sector workforce, tourism, professional services and an emerging health and life-sciences cluster around Lions Gate Hospital. The City should help these sectors grow where doing so fits the community and available land.

I also want economic development measured with practical indicators: business openings and closures, vacancy, employment, permit turnaround times, commercial-space retention and the effects of major City projects on surrounding businesses.

Tourism is already an important part of North Vancouver’s economy. The Shipyards has become a major regional destination, but we should do more to encourage visitors arriving at the waterfront to explore Lower and Central Lonsdale, support local shops and restaurants, and spend more time in the City.

I would treat the Shipyards as a gateway to the rest of North Vancouver, with better wayfinding, stronger connections up Lonsdale, coordinated events and promotion, and practical partnerships with local businesses.

We also need visitor accommodation that does not come at the expense of residents. I support allowing people to host visitors in their own homes, while maintaining strong protections against converting ordinary long-term rental housing into full-time tourist accommodation.

The goal should be more visitor spending in local businesses, without making housing availability worse for the people who live here.

AI should make City Hall easier to deal with, not more distant.

A large amount of municipal work involves repetitive administrative tasks: checking whether an application is complete, finding the right bylaw section, routing files between departments, answering routine questions, comparing submissions against standard requirements and preparing internal documentation.

Those are exactly the kinds of tasks where AI and automation can help.

Permit technology is already moving in this direction. New systems can help applicants identify requirements before they submit, flag missing information, check routine zoning or building-code issues and give staff a more complete file to review. That can reduce unnecessary back-and-forth and allow professional staff to focus on the parts of an application that actually require judgment.

I also want AI used behind the scenes to improve City workflows: summarizing routine material, organizing records, tracking deadlines, identifying bottlenecks and helping departments share information more effectively.

The objective is not to replace planners, inspectors or front-counter staff. It is to take mundane work off their desks so they can spend more time working with people.

Any system that helps make or support a decision affecting a resident or business should still have clear human accountability, an audit trail and appropriate privacy protections. The federal government’s current automated-decision guidance similarly treats AI-assisted administrative decisions as requiring governance even when a human makes the final decision.

Use machines for the repetitive work. Use people for judgment, problem-solving and public service.

A denser city needs more shared outdoor space, not less.

As more North Vancouver residents live in apartments and homes with little or no private outdoor space, parks, plazas, greenways and other public spaces take on a larger role in everyday life. They are places to exercise, meet neighbours, take children outside, walk a dog, sit in the shade or simply get away from four walls.

Growth therefore needs to include the public spaces that make density livable. When we add substantial housing, we should also be asking whether the surrounding neighbourhood has enough accessible park and public space, whether existing spaces can handle the additional use, and where new land or connections should be secured.

I also believe City-owned land should be treated as a long-term public asset. Once strategically located public land is sold, getting it back may be impossible.

One immediate commitment would be to turn the City-owned First Street property between Lonsdale and St. Georges into a municipal park and keep it permanently in public use.

Cars remain an important part of how North Vancouver residents get around, but we have limited street and curb space. The answer is not to pretend cars are going away, nor is it simply to build more road space. We need to use the space we have much more intelligently.

Most trips made by City residents still involve a private vehicle. Transportation planning should reflect how people actually travel while continuing to make walking, cycling and transit practical alternatives. The 2023 North Shore Transportation Survey found 55.8% of trips were made as auto drivers and another 5.4% as passengers.

Parking is part of that transportation system. The objective should not be maximum parking or minimum parking. It should be reliable access. Residents need access to their homes, customers need access to businesses, trades and delivery vehicles need somewhere to stop, and people with mobility challenges need convenient parking.

I support managing high-demand street parking so spaces are actually available, but the results need to be measured. The City currently targets about 85% occupancy in high-demand areas, leaving some spaces available on each block. Parking policy should also consider its effects on nearby businesses and provide practical payment options for people who do not want to rely on a smartphone app.

New housing also needs realistic parking. Provincial rules prevent the City from requiring residential parking minimums in some areas, but developers are still free to provide as much parking as they believe a project needs. I would encourage new developments to provide enough off-street parking to meet expected demand, particularly for larger family homes. Bike rooms and lockers are useful, but they do not make vehicle parking demand disappear.

Where individual buildings cannot meet parking demand, we should consider shared or dedicated parking garages rather than pushing more vehicle storage onto residential and commercial streets.

We also need to plan ahead. Shared vehicles and eventually legal self-driving vehicles could change how much parking we need and where we need it. North Vancouver should plan for off-street mobility hubs where shared vehicles can park, charge, clean and wait between trips, along with well-designed pickup and drop-off areas.

The principle is simple: plan around how people actually travel today, manage scarce space intelligently, and build enough flexibility into the system to adapt to how people may travel tomorrow.

Satellite imagery makes the urban heat problem easy to see. A large part of a city is made up of roofs, roads, parking areas and other hard surfaces. In summer, those surfaces absorb and retain heat while providing little shade or cooling.

We should treat those surfaces as part of the solution.

Large commercial buildings with broad, flat roofs are an obvious opportunity. I want green roofs, or combinations of vegetation and solar panels, to become the normal approach for new commercial buildings where engineering, fire safety and building operations allow it. Existing commercial buildings should be encouraged to retrofit when roofs are replaced or substantially rebuilt.

At street level, we should use mapping and temperature data to identify the hottest parts of the City and concentrate trees, shade and planting where they will make the greatest difference. North Vancouver is already moving toward increased tree canopy on its hottest streets; I would continue that work with measurable targets.

Roads and roofs are unavoidable in a city. They do not all have to function as heat-absorbing surfaces.

Walking should be the foundation of North Vancouver’s active transportation system.

A 2023 North Shore Transportation Survey found that 23.7% of trips by City residents were made on foot, compared with 2.8% by bicycle. Walking is also how people reach transit, shops, restaurants, parks and other destinations. That level of use should be reflected in how we allocate street space and transportation investment.

Sidewalks are more than transportation infrastructure. On major streets and promenades they are part of civic life. They are where people meet neighbours, browse shops, walk with their children and experience the City.

A family pushing a stroller should be able to walk side by side and still leave enough room for another person to pass. People using wheelchairs and mobility aids should have generous, unobstructed routes. Patios, poles, signs, bike racks and street furniture should be designed around maintaining adequate pedestrian space.

Cycling deserves safe and useful infrastructure too, but I do not think busy pedestrian spaces should become default cycling corridors. Where cycling volumes justify dedicated infrastructure, properly separated routes are preferable to forcing cyclists, pedestrians, children, strollers and mobility devices to compete for the same space.

Investment should also focus on completing the pedestrian network: missing sidewalks, narrow sections, unsafe crossings and connections to schools, parks, transit and commercial areas.

The busiest active transportation network in the City is the sidewalk. Our priorities should reflect that.

Zoning should be about more than how many units can fit on a piece of land. It should help determine what kind of homes and neighbourhoods we actually create.

North Vancouver has a shortage of larger homes. The City’s 2024 Housing Needs Report found that only 2% of the existing purpose-built rental stock had three or more bedrooms, while 69% was studios or one-bedroom units. The City already recognizes family housing as a problem and currently requires multi-family projects seeking Council approval to include a minimum share of three-bedroom-or-larger homes.

I want to go further. Projects asking Council for additional density, rezoning or an OCP amendment should provide a stronger mix of genuine family-sized homes, including three- and four-bedroom units. A nominal third bedroom should not turn an otherwise tiny apartment into “family housing.” Units counted toward family-housing requirements should have useful bedrooms, adequate living space, storage and layouts that actually work for households with children.

Building design matters too. Long double-loaded corridors and repetitive small units may maximize unit count, but they do not necessarily produce good homes. British Columbia now permits single-egress-stair buildings up to six storeys subject to additional fire and life-safety requirements. The Province specifically identified greater flexibility for multi-bedroom apartments as one benefit of the change. North Vancouver should make full use of that option where it produces better housing.

I also want OCP amendments initiated by developers handled differently. A developer should be free to propose a project, but when that project requires changing the community’s Official Community Plan, residents should not be presented with only the applicant’s preferred solution. City planners should lead a public planning process that can compare meaningful alternatives in density, building form, housing mix, public space and infrastructure.

The goal should not be the greatest possible number of units. It should be the right mix of homes in buildings and neighbourhoods people can actually live in.

Festivals and events should first serve the people who live here.

The North Shore has a strong community identity, and public events should help neighbours meet, support local businesses and make our public spaces more active and enjoyable.

The Shipyards is an important event space, but programming should not be concentrated there alone. I want more opportunities for neighbourhood-scale events across the City and stronger support for local organizations and businesses that want to put them on.

Visitors are welcome, but the starting point should be creating events that North Shore residents actually want to attend.

Public art does not all need to be permanent.

I would like to see a rotating sculpture program in major public spaces such as the Shipyards, Lonsdale, parks and civic plazas. Works could stay for six months or a year before being replaced, giving residents something new to experience and creating more opportunities for artists.

North Vancouver already supports temporary public art, so this would build on an existing model rather than starting from scratch. A rotating program could also give more North Shore artists a chance to be seen while allowing the City to host interesting work from elsewhere.

Public art should be something residents can keep discovering, not just something installed once and left forever.

Tourism is already an important part of North Vancouver’s economy. The Shipyards has become a major regional destination, but we should do more to encourage visitors arriving at the waterfront to explore Lower and Central Lonsdale, support local shops and restaurants, and spend more time in the City.

I would treat the Shipyards as a gateway to the rest of North Vancouver, with better wayfinding, stronger connections up Lonsdale, coordinated events and promotion, and practical partnerships with local businesses.

We also need visitor accommodation that does not come at the expense of residents. I support allowing people to host visitors in their own homes, while maintaining strong protections against converting ordinary long-term rental housing into full-time tourist accommodation.

The goal should be more visitor spending in local businesses, without making housing availability worse for the people who live here.

We’re building much smaller homes on much less land, but the price isn’t falling by much.

Adding housing supply matters, but density by itself is not an affordability policy. An older detached house on a full lot can sometimes sell for around $1.8 million, while a newly built townhouse on a fraction of that land can still sell for around $1.5 million. Those homes are not identical products, but the comparison raises an important question: if we are using land much more intensively, why are the resulting homes still so expensive?

The City’s own Housing Needs Report says affordability remains one of North Vancouver’s most significant housing problems and that median-income earners cannot afford to purchase any housing type in the City.

We also need to look at what kind of housing we are producing, not just how many units. North Vancouver increasingly relies on apartments, but families need apartments that actually work as family homes.

The City currently requires multi-family developments seeking Council approval to include a minimum 10% share of three-bedroom-or-larger units. I want a stronger focus on genuine three- and four-bedroom homes with usable living areas, storage and layouts designed for families rather than simply adding another small bedroom to an otherwise cramped unit.

Building design can help. B.C. now permits single-egress-stair residential buildings up to six storeys, with additional fire and life-safety requirements. The Province specifically identified greater flexibility for multi-bedroom apartments as one of the benefits of the change. The City should make full use of that flexibility to encourage better family-sized apartments, more natural light and fewer long interior corridors.

Affordable and non-market housing also has an important role for households the private market cannot adequately serve. I support working with senior governments, non-profits and housing providers to expand those options while keeping City-owned land in public hands.

Housing success should not be measured simply by how many units we approve. We should measure what they cost, what people get for that price, whether the homes actually meet their needs, and whether people who already live here can afford to stay.

Property taxes pay for the services and infrastructure residents depend on, but increases should never become automatic.

Before Council approves a tax increase, residents should be able to see what it means in actual dollars, why the additional money is required, what will be delivered with it, and what alternatives were considered.

I want the City to distinguish clearly between maintaining existing services, adding new programs, and funding long-term infrastructure. If taxes are rising faster than inflation, Council should have to explain the reason publicly rather than burying it inside a large financial plan.

In 2026, Council approved a 0.92% operating property-tax increase plus 2% dedicated to capital investment, for a 2.92% baseline increase. The City subsequently received more revenue than expected from new construction and other non-market assessment growth, and staff proposed placing that additional revenue in a reserve to help moderate future property-tax increases. I support making that kind of approach a regular fiscal principle.

Growth should help pay for growth. When new development expands the tax base, the first question should be what additional infrastructure and services that growth requires, and whether the new revenue can reduce pressure on existing taxpayers.

I also want property-tax communication to be clearer. A rise in your assessment does not automatically mean your municipal taxes rise by the same percentage. Your municipal share depends partly on how your property's assessment changes relative to other properties in the same class. And in 2026, about 42% of the taxes collected by the City were actually collected on behalf of other bodies such as TransLink, Metro Vancouver, BC Assessment and the Province, which the City does not control.

The principle is simple: tell taxpayers what something costs, tell them what they are getting for it, and then measure whether the City delivered.

There are people the private housing market will not adequately serve, and public, non-market and supportive housing have an important role in filling that gap.

The City’s own Housing Needs Report says non-market housing has not kept pace with demand. It also recognizes that housing needs range from emergency and supportive housing through non-market rental and market housing, with the greatest levels of affordability generally requiring public funding.

I do not think that means the City of North Vancouver needs to become a large-scale housing developer. The Province, federal government, non-profit housing societies and other experienced providers are better positioned to finance, build and operate this housing.

The City can make those projects easier to deliver. That means predictable zoning, faster approvals, clear requirements, access to the Affordable Housing Reserve Fund and partnerships with organizations that can bring senior-government funding to North Vancouver. The City already has tools such as its Housing Initiatives Grant and Affordable Housing Reserve Fund that can support this work.

Supportive housing should also come with the supports its residents actually need. Housing is important, but where people require health, disability, mental-health or other ongoing assistance, the appropriate services and experienced operators need to be part of the plan.

I also want to keep City-owned land in public hands. We can support genuinely affordable housing without treating public land as a disposable source of development sites.

The City’s job should be to make good housing projects possible, remove unnecessary municipal barriers and bring the right partners together.

North Vancouver already has a lot of rental housing people can afford only because it was built decades ago. When those buildings are redeveloped, the City needs to pay attention to more than the number of new units. What was lost? What replaced it? How much more does it cost? Can the people who lived there actually come back?

I want a meaningful right to return for tenants displaced by redevelopment. If someone has made a building their home for years, redevelopment should not automatically price them out of their neighbourhood. Returning tenants should have the opportunity to move back into an appropriately sized unit at a protected rent, rather than simply receiving first chance to rent a new unit at a price they may no longer be able to afford.

North Vancouver’s existing Tenant Displacement Policy already provides relocation assistance and a first right of refusal, but it does not generally guarantee a return at the tenant’s previous rent. Other B.C. municipalities have gone further. Vancouver now provides returning tenants in several redevelopment areas the right to return at their current rent, or below-market rent where that is lower. B.C.’s Community Charter also gives municipalities authority to require redevelopment applicants to offer comparable replacement rental units to displaced tenants.

We should also distinguish between purpose-built rental housing and rented strata condominiums. Condo rentals are an important part of the market, but they are secondary rental stock. Individual owners can sell their units and remove them from the rental market. Purpose-built rental provides much greater long-term security because the building itself remains rental housing.

Rented condos also tend to cost more. Across Metro Vancouver in 2024, the average rented condominium cost about 32% more than the average purpose-built rental unit. Condos tend to be newer and larger, so strata ownership is not the sole reason for that difference, but it reinforces why simply counting every rented condo as equivalent to secure purpose-built rental can be misleading.

More rental housing is good. Losing affordable rental stock and calling the replacement a success is not.

Zoning should be about more than how many units can fit on a piece of land. It should help determine what kind of homes and neighbourhoods we actually create.

North Vancouver has a shortage of larger homes. The City’s 2024 Housing Needs Report found that only 2% of the existing purpose-built rental stock had three or more bedrooms, while 69% was studios or one-bedroom units. The City already recognizes family housing as a problem and currently requires multi-family projects seeking Council approval to include a minimum share of three-bedroom-or-larger homes.

I want to go further. Projects asking Council for additional density, rezoning or an OCP amendment should provide a stronger mix of genuine family-sized homes, including three- and four-bedroom units. A nominal third bedroom should not turn an otherwise tiny apartment into “family housing.” Units counted toward family-housing requirements should have useful bedrooms, adequate living space, storage and layouts that actually work for households with children.

Building design matters too. Long double-loaded corridors and repetitive small units may maximize unit count, but they do not necessarily produce good homes. British Columbia now permits single-egress-stair buildings up to six storeys subject to additional fire and life-safety requirements. The Province specifically identified greater flexibility for multi-bedroom apartments as one benefit of the change. North Vancouver should make full use of that option where it produces better housing.

I also want OCP amendments initiated by developers handled differently. A developer should be free to propose a project, but when that project requires changing the community’s Official Community Plan, residents should not be presented with only the applicant’s preferred solution. City planners should lead a public planning process that can compare meaningful alternatives in density, building form, housing mix, public space and infrastructure.

The goal should not be the greatest possible number of units. It should be the right mix of homes in buildings and neighbourhoods people can actually live in.

Good design benefits everyone. Wider sidewalks, step-free access, safer crossings, clear wayfinding, places to rest and well-designed public buildings help people with disabilities, but they also help seniors, parents with strollers, children and anyone dealing with a temporary injury.

Accessibility should be built in from the beginning rather than treated as an expensive retrofit later.

AI should make City Hall easier to deal with, not more distant.

A large amount of municipal work involves repetitive administrative tasks: checking whether an application is complete, finding the right bylaw section, routing files between departments, answering routine questions, comparing submissions against standard requirements and preparing internal documentation.

Those are exactly the kinds of tasks where AI and automation can help.

Permit technology is already moving in this direction. New systems can help applicants identify requirements before they submit, flag missing information, check routine zoning or building-code issues and give staff a more complete file to review. That can reduce unnecessary back-and-forth and allow professional staff to focus on the parts of an application that actually require judgment.

I also want AI used behind the scenes to improve City workflows: summarizing routine material, organizing records, tracking deadlines, identifying bottlenecks and helping departments share information more effectively.

The objective is not to replace planners, inspectors or front-counter staff. It is to take mundane work off their desks so they can spend more time working with people.

Any system that helps make or support a decision affecting a resident or business should still have clear human accountability, an audit trail and appropriate privacy protections. The federal government’s current automated-decision guidance similarly treats AI-assisted administrative decisions as requiring governance even when a human makes the final decision.

Use machines for the repetitive work. Use people for judgment, problem-solving and public service.

A good City budget should be sustainable, understandable and able to withstand slower growth.

North Vancouver is growing, and that growth brings new revenue. It also brings new costs: infrastructure, parks, transportation, utilities and City services all have to keep up.

The danger is allowing temporary growth-related revenue to support permanent increases in operating spending. If development slows, taxpayers can be left carrying those costs.

I want the City to clearly separate ongoing revenue from one-time or growth-related revenue, and to test its financial plans against periods of slower development.

Residents should also be able to understand the budget without being accountants. The City should clearly show what services cost, how those costs are changing, what taxpayers are getting for additional spending, and which expenditures are growing faster than inflation.

Growth should help pay for the infrastructure growth requires. Unexpected revenue should strengthen reserves, reduce future tax pressure or fund long-term infrastructure before it is used to create new permanent expenses.

The goal is simple: a City government we can afford in good years and slower ones.

City Hall should be accountable for results, not just intentions.

Residents and businesses should know what the City requires, who is responsible for their file, how long a decision should take and whether the City is meeting its own standards.

I would establish clear service targets for common City processes, including:

1. 5 business days for straightforward small-project permits
2. 10 business days for straightforward single-family permits
3. 1 week for business licences

These are service standards, not an excuse to weaken building, safety or regulatory requirements. The objective is to make the process predictable. If an application is incomplete, the applicant should be told what is missing. If the City cannot meet its target, the applicant should be told why and given a revised timeline.

Performance against those standards should be published. Over time, residents should be able to see whether turnaround times are improving or getting worse and where delays are occurring.

Major capital projects need the same discipline. Residents should be able to see the original and current budget, schedule, scope, financing, use of public land, major changes and forecast final cost in one place. When a major project is completed, the City should report what changed, why it changed and whether the promised outcomes were delivered.

Good governance also requires clear conflict-of-interest standards. Potential conflicts involving elected officials or City staff should be identified, disclosed and managed consistently.

If we don't measure how City Hall performs, we can't manage it or improve it.

North Vancouver needs to plan farther ahead than the next budget or development application.

Growth creates long-term obligations. More residents mean more demand on roads, utilities, parks, recreation facilities, transportation and City services. Those costs should be identified when growth is planned, not years later when infrastructure is already under pressure.

I want the City to maintain a long-term infrastructure plan that shows what major assets will need to be built, replaced or upgraded, when that work is expected, what it will cost and how it will be funded.

Major projects should also be evaluated on their full cost, not simply the construction contract. That includes financing, future operating and maintenance costs, major scope changes, and the value of public land sold or committed to make the project possible.

City-owned land should be treated as a long-term public asset. Once strategic land is sold, future Councils may never have the opportunity to replace it. Decisions involving public land should therefore be made with a generational horizon, not simply to balance the finances of one project.

Long-term planning also means building flexibility into the City. Transportation technology will change. Housing needs will change. Our population will age. Infrastructure built today should be adaptable enough to serve needs we can reasonably anticipate tomorrow.

The question should not only be, “Can we build this now?” It should also be, “What will this decision mean for North Vancouver 20, 30, 60 years from now?”

Public engagement should happen while there are still real choices to make.

Too often, consultation can feel like residents are being asked to comment on a solution after most of the important decisions have already been made. I want engagement to happen earlier, with the choices and trade-offs made clear from the beginning.

This is particularly important when a developer is seeking an amendment to the Official Community Plan. The developer should be free to present its proposal, but changing the community’s long-term plan is a City planning decision. City planners should engage directly with residents and, where practical, present meaningful alternatives in density, building form, housing mix, public space, transportation and community amenities before one option becomes the preferred outcome.

North Vancouver currently uses applicant-led Developer Information Sessions for some major development and OCP amendment applications. For example, the City’s materials for recent OCP amendment applications explicitly describe those sessions as applicant-led or developer-led.

B.C.’s Local Government Act requires municipalities considering an OCP or OCP amendment to provide appropriate opportunities for consultation and to consider whether that consultation should be early and ongoing. It does not limit a municipality to presenting a single planning option.

Major City consultations should also be transparent about the question being asked. Residents should know what is genuinely open to change, what legal or financial constraints exist, who ultimately makes the decision and how the results will be used.

Surveys and open houses are useful, but participation numbers should not automatically be treated as a representative vote of the entire City. The City should publish how many people participated, what groups or neighbourhoods were reached, the major themes raised, and how that information influenced the final recommendation.

Most importantly, every substantial engagement process should end with a simple accounting: what we heard, what we changed, what we did not change, and why.

A developer can propose a project. The City and its residents should plan the community.

Use the right response for the problem, with mental-health professionals and crisis services taking the lead where police are not required for immediate safety

Strengthen North Shore mental-health and crisis-response partnerships so police are not the default response when health professionals, outreach workers or other services are better suited

Fund the North Vancouver RCMP according to actual calls for service, response times, crime trends and demonstrated staffing needs, with clear public reporting on results

Coordinate policing, mental-health care, housing and outreach, youth services and public-space management so problems are addressed before they become repeated emergency calls

Recreation facilities should be practical, well used, and delivered without taking a generation to build.

I want the City to develop a costed plan to bring an outdoor public pool back to Mahon Park.

I would defer the Harbour Swimming Deck until the Lonsdale Quay waterfront is properly planned as a major transportation hub. That area is too important for piecemeal decisions.

Harry Jerome shows why major-project discipline matters. Earlier plans included amenities such as a 50-metre pool, curling and a rooftop walking track that did not make it into the final project. Twenty years is a long time to plan and deliver a replacement recreation centre.

When the City commits to a major recreation project, residents should know what is being built, what it will cost and when it will open. Significant changes to scope, cost or schedule should be reported clearly as they happen.

Build the right facility, keep the promises, and get it open.

A denser city needs more shared outdoor space, not less.

As more North Vancouver residents live in apartments and homes with little or no private outdoor space, parks, plazas, greenways and other public spaces take on a larger role in everyday life. They are places to exercise, meet neighbours, take children outside, walk a dog, sit in the shade or simply get away from four walls.

Growth therefore needs to include the public spaces that make density livable. When we add substantial housing, we should also be asking whether the surrounding neighbourhood has enough accessible park and public space, whether existing spaces can handle the additional use, and where new land or connections should be secured.

I also believe City-owned land should be treated as a long-term public asset. Once strategically located public land is sold, getting it back may be impossible.

One immediate commitment would be to turn the City-owned First Street property between Lonsdale and St. Georges into a municipal park and keep it permanently in public use.

Lions Gate Hospital is one of North Vancouver’s most important pieces of infrastructure, even though the City does not operate it.

The City does control many of the things around it: zoning, development approvals, sidewalks, streets, parking, transit connections and public space. Those decisions should make it easier for patients, staff and emergency services to reach the hospital.

I also support building on the health economy already developing around Lions Gate Hospital. The City’s Economic Strategy identifies the hospital area as the centre of a potential health and biosciences cluster, creating opportunities for medical services, research, technology and local employment.

The busiest active transportation network in North Vancouver is the sidewalk. Our priorities should reflect that.

Walking is not just transportation. Good sidewalks and promenades are part of civic life. They are where people meet neighbours, browse shops, walk with their children and experience the City.

A family pushing a stroller should be able to walk side by side and still leave room for someone to pass. Someone using a wheelchair or mobility aid should not have to weave around poles, signs, patios, bike racks or other obstacles.

The City’s 2023 transportation survey found that 23.7% of trips by City residents were made on foot, compared with 2.8% by bicycle. Walking should therefore receive serious attention when we decide where active-transportation money and street space go.

Cycling deserves safe, connected infrastructure too, but bicycles and pedestrians should not automatically be put into the same space. On busy promenades and major pedestrian streets, walking should come first. Where cycling volumes justify it, properly separated cycling infrastructure is a better solution than forcing cyclists, pedestrians, children, strollers and mobility devices to compete for a narrow corridor. The City’s Safe Mobility Strategy itself calls for protected mobility lanes that separate slower-moving modes from both cars and pedestrians.

We should also concentrate on the basics: missing sidewalks, narrow sections, unsafe crossings and connections to schools, parks, transit and commercial areas. The City already identifies completing the sidewalk network and improving narrow sidewalks on busy pedestrian corridors as priorities.

Walking infrastructure should make people want to spend time in the City, not simply move through it.

Zoning should be about more than how many units can fit on a piece of land. It should help determine what kind of homes and neighbourhoods we actually create.

North Vancouver has a shortage of larger homes. The City’s 2024 Housing Needs Report found that only 2% of the existing purpose-built rental stock had three or more bedrooms, while 69% was studios or one-bedroom units. The City already recognizes family housing as a problem and currently requires multi-family projects seeking Council approval to include a minimum share of three-bedroom-or-larger homes.

I want to go further. Projects asking Council for additional density, rezoning or an OCP amendment should provide a stronger mix of genuine family-sized homes, including three- and four-bedroom units. A nominal third bedroom should not turn an otherwise tiny apartment into “family housing.” Units counted toward family-housing requirements should have useful bedrooms, adequate living space, storage and layouts that actually work for households with children.

Building design matters too. Long double-loaded corridors and repetitive small units may maximize unit count, but they do not necessarily produce good homes. British Columbia now permits single-egress-stair buildings up to six storeys subject to additional fire and life-safety requirements. The Province specifically identified greater flexibility for multi-bedroom apartments as one benefit of the change. North Vancouver should make full use of that option where it produces better housing.

I also want OCP amendments initiated by developers handled differently. A developer should be free to propose a project, but when that project requires changing the community’s Official Community Plan, residents should not be presented with only the applicant’s preferred solution. City planners should lead a public planning process that can compare meaningful alternatives in density, building form, housing mix, public space and infrastructure.

The goal should not be the greatest possible number of units. It should be the right mix of homes in buildings and neighbourhoods people can actually live in.

Cars remain an important part of how North Vancouver residents get around, but we have limited street and curb space. The answer is not to pretend cars are going away, nor is it simply to build more road space. We need to use the space we have much more intelligently.

Most trips made by City residents still involve a private vehicle. Transportation planning should reflect how people actually travel while continuing to make walking, cycling and transit practical alternatives. The 2023 North Shore Transportation Survey found 55.8% of trips were made as auto drivers and another 5.4% as passengers.

Parking is part of that transportation system. The objective should not be maximum parking or minimum parking. It should be reliable access. Residents need access to their homes, customers need access to businesses, trades and delivery vehicles need somewhere to stop, and people with mobility challenges need convenient parking.

I support managing high-demand street parking so spaces are actually available, but the results need to be measured. The City currently targets about 85% occupancy in high-demand areas, leaving some spaces available on each block. Parking policy should also consider its effects on nearby businesses and provide practical payment options for people who do not want to rely on a smartphone app.

New housing also needs realistic parking. Provincial rules prevent the City from requiring residential parking minimums in some areas, but developers are still free to provide as much parking as they believe a project needs. I would encourage new developments to provide enough off-street parking to meet expected demand, particularly for larger family homes. Bike rooms and lockers are useful, but they do not make vehicle parking demand disappear.

Where individual buildings cannot meet parking demand, we should consider shared or dedicated parking garages rather than pushing more vehicle storage onto residential and commercial streets.

We also need to plan ahead. Shared vehicles and eventually legal self-driving vehicles could change how much parking we need and where we need it. North Vancouver should plan for off-street mobility hubs where shared vehicles can park, charge, clean and wait between trips, along with well-designed pickup and drop-off areas.

The principle is simple: plan around how people actually travel today, manage scarce space intelligently, and build enough flexibility into the system to adapt to how people may travel tomorrow.

The busiest active transportation network in North Vancouver is the sidewalk. Our priorities should reflect that.

Walking is not just transportation. Good sidewalks and promenades are part of civic life. They are where people meet neighbours, browse shops, walk with their children and experience the City.

A family pushing a stroller should be able to walk side by side and still leave room for someone to pass. Someone using a wheelchair or mobility aid should not have to weave around poles, signs, patios, bike racks or other obstacles.

The City’s 2023 transportation survey found that 23.7% of trips by City residents were made on foot, compared with 2.8% by bicycle. Walking should therefore receive serious attention when we decide where active-transportation money and street space go.

Cycling deserves safe, connected infrastructure too, but bicycles and pedestrians should not automatically be put into the same space. On busy promenades and major pedestrian streets, walking should come first. Where cycling volumes justify it, properly separated cycling infrastructure is a better solution than forcing cyclists, pedestrians, children, strollers and mobility devices to compete for a narrow corridor. The City’s Safe Mobility Strategy itself calls for protected mobility lanes that separate slower-moving modes from both cars and pedestrians.

We should also concentrate on the basics: missing sidewalks, narrow sections, unsafe crossings and connections to schools, parks, transit and commercial areas. The City already identifies completing the sidewalk network and improving narrow sidewalks on busy pedestrian corridors as priorities.

Walking infrastructure should make people want to spend time in the City, not simply move through it.

North Vancouver’s geography calls for transportation ideas that fit North Vancouver.

We have steep hills, limited road space and major destinations spread across different elevations. Aerial ropeways are proven technology and could be a strong fit here.

I want the North Shore to take the initiative and invite private-sector proposals to finance, build and operate a local ropeway network, while coordinating with TransLink so transfers are simple and the system connects properly with regional transit.

Regional rapid transit should bring people to the North Shore. From there, passengers should be able to transfer into a fast local network designed around North Shore destinations.

Lonsdale Quay should be planned as the key transportation node connecting SeaBus, buses, future rapid transit, ropeways and potential passenger rail.

TransLink connects us to the region. A North Shore network should move us around the North Shore.

Walking should be the foundation of North Vancouver’s active transportation system.

A 2023 North Shore Transportation Survey found that 23.7% of trips by City residents were made on foot, compared with 2.8% by bicycle. Walking is also how people reach transit, shops, restaurants, parks and other destinations. That level of use should be reflected in how we allocate street space and transportation investment.

Sidewalks are more than transportation infrastructure. On major streets and promenades they are part of civic life. They are where people meet neighbours, browse shops, walk with their children and experience the City.

A family pushing a stroller should be able to walk side by side and still leave enough room for another person to pass. People using wheelchairs and mobility aids should have generous, unobstructed routes. Patios, poles, signs, bike racks and street furniture should be designed around maintaining adequate pedestrian space.

Cycling deserves safe and useful infrastructure too, but I do not think busy pedestrian spaces should become default cycling corridors. Where cycling volumes justify dedicated infrastructure, properly separated routes are preferable to forcing cyclists, pedestrians, children, strollers and mobility devices to compete for the same space.

Investment should also focus on completing the pedestrian network: missing sidewalks, narrow sections, unsafe crossings and connections to schools, parks, transit and commercial areas.

The busiest active transportation network in the City is the sidewalk. Our priorities should reflect that.