►
Description
Special Joint Meeting of the Planning Committee and the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee - Tuesday, January 26, 2021
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
A
A
A
As
promised
yesterday
we're
going
to
do,
we
have
any
other
motions
that
we
didn't
have
yesterday.
A
Does
anyone
who
is
part
of
the
meeting,
whether
you're,
a
committee,
member
or
otherwise,
have
emotion?
A
I
would
imagine
we
might
get
a
few
once
the
rest
of
the
the
counselors
are
finished
with
the
covet
meeting
and
join
us,
so
we'll
have
to
be
prepared
for
that
and
we'll
look
for
guidance
on
which
ones
we
deal
with
when
so
we're
going
to
read
what
we
know
right
now
introduce,
and
I
think
we
have
everybody
in
the
room
that
is
moving
anything
at
this
point
and
then
we
will
go
to
questions
are
the
is
the
op
team
on
yet
melody
here?
A
C
Thank
you
manager.
I
also
have
two.
C
Whereas
in
the
last
few
years
there
has
been
rapid
changes
to
the
system
of
distribution
of
goods
in
the
cities
as
a
result
of
the
surge
in
e-commerce.
Business,
therefore,
be
it
resolve
that
a
review.
Consider
the
following
and
there's
four
points:
residential
development
patterns
through
intensification
and
on
greenfield
lands
from
2020
to
2026
and
whether
that
has
resulted
in
any
observable
change
to
the
market,
housing
demand
and
affordability.
C
A
Thank
you,
counselor,
hubli
and
and
just
from
my
own
interest
did
you
say
you
have
another
motion.
C
Yes,
there's
another
one
that
I
submit
through
stop
to
deal
with:
jason
highway,
400
series,
interchanges.
C
A
Thank
you,
oh
I'll,
take
care
of
that.
Thank
you,
and
so
we're
going
to
go
now
to
counselor
tierney,
who
has
a
motion
to
introduce
counselor
tyranny.
D
Great
thank
you
very
much,
madam
chair.
Where
is
in
2017
at
the
start
of
the
official
plan
process
city
council
directed
staff
to
develop
this
official
plan
within
the
intensive
within
the
intensification
of
completing
the
communities
and
planning
for
a
new
community
to
accommodate
the
city's
growth
in
the
environment
and
fiscally
sustainable
manner.
Whereas
in
may,
2020
council
adopted
a
blended
methodology
for
determining
new
lands
to
come
into
the
urban
boundary
in
this
op.
D
D
Whereas
city
council
is
committed
to
regulation
with
the
reconciliation
with
the
local
indigenous
communities
and
recognize
the
important
work
of
the
algonquins
of
ontario
as
a
meaningful
opportunity
towards
achieving
this
goal.
Whereas
in
february
2018
city
council
adopted
a
formal
commitment
to
the
truth
and
recognition
action
plan
that
includes
supporting
supporting
opportunities
to
weave
indigenous
communities
into
the
socioeconomic
fabric
of
ottawa,
an
environmentally
sustainable
way
therefore
be
resolved.
D
That
the
joint
planning
committee
and
agricultural
role
affairs
committee
recommend
to
council
approve
the
following
recommendation:
five
of
the
staff
report
to
be
amended
as
follows:
direct
staff
that
the
remaining
270
hectares
be
added
to
the
urban
boundary
on
the
lands
identified
as
irwin
and
that
the
staff
focus
on
the
creation
of
a
new
community
on
the
turowin
lands
and
staff
be
directed
to
work
with
the
algonquins
of
ontario
between
now
and
june.
D
To
identify
the
specific
lands
in
the
land
use
schedule
of
the
new
official
plan
and
be
understood
that
council's
intent
in
the
spirit
of
a
positive
and
constructive
relationship
with
the
algonquins
of
ontario
and
respect
for
their
objectives
of
turwin.
That
planning
process
for
this
new
community
will
be
expeditious
and
collaborative
in
the
planning
process
via
further
resolve
that
the
staff
be
directed
to
work
with
the
algonquins
of
ontario
and
their
representatives
to
help
secure
the
funding
from
the
federal
and
provincial
governments
to
support
the
turwin
development.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
very
much.
Councillor
tierney.
Now
we're
going
to
go
to
vice
to
co-chair
al-shantery
who's
going
to
move
to
the
first
one
is
the
technical
amendments,
staff
corrections
and
follow,
and
so
perhaps
you
could
do
that
one
first,
okay,.
E
Yes,
thank
you.
Thank
you,
chair
harder,
where
the
report
of
a
new
official
plan
growth
management
report
to
lands
proposed
for
residential
and
industrial
urban
expansion,
details,
specific
land
for
urban,
commercial
and
industrial
growth
framed
by
establishment
of
gold
dealt
in
the
new
orp
to
direct
future
urban
development
away
from
ottawa,
agricultural
and
natural
area,
and
whereas
there
have
been
several
administ
administrative
errors
found
in
the
report
since
it
was
published
on
january
15.
E
2021,
therefore
be
it
resolved
that
the
joint
planning
committee
and
agriculture
and
rural
affairs
committee
recommended
to
council
that
the
following
corrections
and
additions
should
be
made
to
the
main
report
and
document
one
in
the
main
report
on
page
two
recommendation.
Fourth
replace
reference
to
appendix
a
and
b
with
appendix
a
b
on
page
three
in
recommendations.
E
Five,
I
replace
reference
to
inclusion
in
recommendation
two
with
inclusion
in
recommendation
three
and
c
on
page
3
and
recommendation
5
double.
I
replace
reference
to
appendix
d
with
appendix
f
d
on
page
3
and
recommendation
five
reply:
replace
reference
to
appendix
a
with
appendix
f
item
number
two
in
document,
two
staff
notice,
a
number
of
corrections,
and
I
want
you
to
place
a
replace,
all
train
and
all
map
legends
with
all
chains.
E
D,
page
17
and
18
correct
the
bar
haven't
self
cluster
scores
in
brackets,
with
a
score
as
shown
below
e
page
19,
add
the
property
at
38.72,
rideau
valley
drive
less
than
two
hectare
in
size
to
a
cluster
b.
Three
f
page
24
correct
the
riverside
south
cluster
score
in
bracket
with
score,
as
shown
below
page
31,
correct
the
literal
cluster
scores
in
bracket
with
score
and
added
row,
l
dash
three
underscore
one
and
l
dash
four.
A
Thank
you
for
introducing
that
motion.
Would
you
be
able
to
introduce
the
motion
please
next,
on
the
south
march
lands.
E
Whereas
further
expansion
in
the
area
towards
dundrobin
and
south
march
highland,
my
stir,
speculation,
land
investment
for
future
investment,
which
is
also
contrary
to
the
city.
Intent
to
prevent
encroachment
on
villages,
therefore
be
it
resolved
that
joint
planning
and
agricultural
rural
affairs
committee
recommend
that
council
approve
a
self-march
land
cluster,
identify
and
recommendation
3
be
removed
and
the
land
supply
175.35
net
hectare.
He
added
to
the
new
community
option.
In
recommendation.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Another
motion
counselor
is
counselor
meehan
in
the
in
the
meeting.
Yet
let
me
just
check.
A
F
F
Therefore,
be
it
resolved
that
the
joint
planning
committee
and
agricultural
and
rural
affairs
committee
recommend
council
approve
that
the
path
to
cluster
in
riverside
south,
representing
106.29
net
hectares
be
removed
and
an
equivalent
amount
of
land
be
added
between
the
existing
riverside
south
community
and
the
past.
One
lands
proposed
to
be
added
so
that
the
riverside,
so
that
so
that
riverside
south
can
form
a
logical
boundary
that
is
contained
north
of
rideau
road.
A
Thank
you
very
much
councillor
man.
Now
I
have
two
directions
that
are
counselor
dude
assets
and
just
before
we
go
to
those,
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I
think
what
we're
going
to
do
is
because
we
didn't
ask
any
questions
yesterday,
and
this
is
very
complex
subject.
Obviously,
a
whole
heck
of
a
lot
of
work
has
gone
into
it
and
I'm
sure
you
all
have
questions
that
are
pertaining
to
the
overall
document.
So
this
is
the
way
I
suggest
we
proceed.
A
If
you
want
again,
I
will
remind
you
that
I'm
going
to
try
my
best,
at
least
if
you
signed
up
from
the
beginning
and
put
your
hand
up,
I
will
go
with
members
of
the
joint
committee
and
then
then,
in
the
order
of
ward
order
of
those
who
are
not
on
the
joint
committee
who
want
to
speak
after
we
get
going,
though
I'm
not
going
to
continue
to
play
around
with
it.
A
So
if
you
know
you
want
to
speak
on
just
questions
of
the
report
sign
up
now
on
participants
and
then
after
that,
after
we
go
through
questions,
I
think
at
that
point
we
will
I'll
go
back
to
the
movers
of
each
of
the
motions
and
ask
them
to
say
why
they're
moving
it
and
then
we'll
get
right
into
debate
of
all
those
motions
and
directions.
Okay.
A
So
let's
go
to
counselor
dude
right
now
for
her
directions
and
then
I
know
we
have
another
motion
from
counselor
hubley
that
he
will
put
on
the
floor
after
the
directions.
Certainly.
B
Should
they
be,
should
they
be
recommended
for
inclusion
within
the
urban
boundary?
This
identification,
which
shall
be
consistent
with
the
lands
being
designated
and
available
within
the
meaning
of
the
provincial
policy
statement,
should
include
the
specific
mobility
and
infrastructure
upgrades
that
are
required
in
order
for
the
development
of
these
lands
under
the
new
official
plan,
which
will
then
be
evaluated
and
specified
in
the
update
to
the
transportation
master
plan
melody.
Are
you
able
to
scroll
down?
B
And
I'll
I'll
just
quickly
read
that
second
direction
and
then
yes,
please,
certainly
that
staff
be
directed
to
include
in
the
fourth
coming
coming
official
plan
report
on
the
gold
belt.
Specifics
on
the
proposal
that
provide
clarity
to
residents,
planners
developers,
investors
etc.
With
regard
to
the
belt
that
the
belt
gold
belt
does
not
affect
land
use,
designations
and
policy
in
the
gold
belt
for
the
underlying
land
uses
not
impeding
the
city's
flexibility
to
deploy
necessary.
C
You,
madam
chair
and
my
apologies
for
the
confusion
here,
whereas
the
city
of
ottawa
is
recognized
as
a
strong
location
in
the
international
marketplace
as
a
growing
hub
for
goods,
movement
facilities
and
whereas
the
prime
location
for
these
sites
are
adjacent
to
highway,
400
series
interchanges
and
whereas
the
majority
of
lands
adjacent
to
the
highway
400
series
interchanges
within
the
urban
area
are
owned
and
controlled
by
the
ncc
and
whereas
staff
have
recommended
the
approval
of
lands
identified
in
appendix
e
as
edward
representing
land
clusters
of
20
net
hectares
as
new
rural,
industrial,
freight
and
storage
lands
and
direct
staff
to
insert
this
appendix
into
the
draft
official
plan
for
technical
circulation
purposes.
C
A
Thank
you
councillor
cubley,
so
now,
as
I
said,
we're
going
to
go
for
go
to
the
the
room.
If
you
will
for
general
questions
and
I
see
up
on
the
screen
so
far,
scott
councillor
moffat,
councilor,
leeper,
councillor
jerusalem,
counselor,
moffat,
you're
first
doesn't
happen.
Often.
A
I
was
going
to
wait
for
that,
but
go
ahead.
You
can
ask,
who
are
you
going
to
ask
it
up,
though
the
movers
or
the
staff.
G
A
But
we
are
going
to
go
and
introduce
them
individually.
So
because
it's
a
lot
coming
at
everybody-
and
I
think
we
didn't
give
the
opportunity
to
any
of
the
counselors
to
say
why
they
were
moving
it.
A
G
So
on
the
the
motion
moved
by
counselor
tierney
about
the
tea
wind
lands,
that's
270
hectares
added
to
the
urban
boundary.
Does
that
mean
that
those
lands
would
be
added
now,
and
the
previous
recommendation
of
further
review
on
it
on
a
new
community
in
category
3
would
now
be
off
the
table,
and
we
would
now
only
be
looking
at
taiwan
as
we
would
actually
be
permanently
adding
these
lands
to
the
boundary
today.
A
And
we're
going
to
go
to
mr
mark
for
a
response
on
that.
H
G
H
The
way
the
motion
is
worded
today
and
mr
mark
could
confirm
it
and
the
way
the
pps
would
work
is
we
have
to
identify
it
as
a
as
on
the
land
use
schedule
scenario
we
have
to
work
on
we'll
have
to
refine
exactly
where
those
lands
actually
are.
Pps
gives
us
some
flexibility
on
that,
but
my
interpretation
is
that
is
what
we
would
be
allocating
would
be
allocated
to
that
area.
G
And
then
you
take
cancer
alchanteri's
motion
which
removes
it
from
south
march
highlands
and
then
adds
those
lands
which
is
about
also
170
hectares.
Now
we're
looking
at
440
hectares,
we're
not
off
on
my
math
two
taywin,
so
guaranteed
440
hectares
to
taywin
by
a
vote
today.
H
G
Should
the
concern
in
the
reports
come
to
fruition
and
that
the
further
review
upon
those
lands
could
yield
that
those
lands
are
not
able
to
be
developed
within
the
time
frame
and
requirement
to
meet
the
con?
The
conditions
set
up
by
the
province
and
having
the
15-year
land
supply?
Would
we
be
at
risk
of
having
those
440
hectares
in
the
boundary
but
not
developed
and
then
having
to
come
back
and
look
at
additional
440
hectares
elsewhere?.
H
Jerry's,
we
have
lands
in
the
urban
boundary
today
in
2020
that
have
not
yet
been
2021.
Sorry
that
have
not
yet
been
developed.
They've
been
designated
in
prior
official
plans
and
just
because
they've
not
been
pre
adopted
in
the
past,
they
remain
within
our
land
budget
as
available
land.
There
are
examples
of
the
south
north
canada
there's
lands
in
the
southeast
urban
community
as
well,
so
those
lands.
My
understanding
is,
if
they
are
allocated
by
council,
should
council
do
it.
They
would
be
part
of
the
available
land
it's
just.
H
There
would
be
a
risk
that
additional
land
would
have
to
be
added.
We'd
have
to
see
at
the
time
based
on
the
projections
what
the
15
years
would
be
and
whether
or
not
the
full
440.
remember
we
are
we're
designating
land
for
25
years.
So
if
there
is
other
land
within
the
system
that
could
still
meet
our
15
years
and
and
that's
a
rolling
number
throughout
time,
we
may
be
okay,
but
there
is.
There
is
a
possibility
that
if
it's
not
developed
within
the
time
frame
that
we
would
have
to
go,
find
additional
land.
G
Okay,
thanks
on
the
motion
from
cancer
hubley
and
adding
lands
that
are
currently
designated
cultural
lands
on
moody
drive,
I
have
seen
a
soils
report
for
2861
moody
drive
and
2915
moody
drive.
I
have
yet
to
see
a
soils
report
for
2831
moody
drive,
which
has
a
higher
score
through
our
leader
than
the
previous
two
properties
that
I
mentioned
the
score
in
the
report
that
we've
created
and
improved
in
2016
is
146..
G
H
I
don't
believe
we
do.
Mr
herwire
can
correct
me
and
that's
why
it's
our
recommendation
that
this
matter
be
referred
back
to
staff
for
further
review,
with
whatever
available
information
is
because
staff
cannot
make
a
determination
today
on
the
validity
of
those
assertions,
and
we
would
like
time
to
review
it.
G
That's
fair,
I
don't!
I
don't
refute
that
there
are
lands
south
of
that
that
do
not
score
our
own
leader
had
one
property
scored
at
104,
so
I
know
that
those
lands
they
get
caught
up
in
the
bigger
bundle,
but
in
order
to
get
from
foul
field
to
those
lands
you
have
to
cut
through
that
land.
That's
parcel
that
scored
146.
G
thanks
and
then
just
one
final
question
and
I
might
talk
later,
but
I
just
wanted
to
get
these
things
out
of
the
way.
The
riverside
south
motion
to
add
prime
class,
which
would
be
class
two
farmland
in
consideration
of
of
agricultural
scores.
Of
course,
class
one
is
the
best.
We
don't
have
a
lot
of
that
in
eastern
ontario,
so
the
best
lands
that
we
have
are
generally
scored
in
the
155,
the
165
to
175
range.
The
lands
in
this
motion
north
of
rio
road
do
score.
G
I
Madam
chair,
mr
chair,
in
the
process
for
the
adoption
of
the
comprehensive
official
plan,
one
matter
that
has
yet
to
come
forward,
as
members
of
the
joint
committee
will
be
aware,
is
the
public
meeting
that
is
to
occur
in
the
second
quarter
of
this
year.
I
I.E
that
when
someone
comes
forward
and
makes
submissions
to
the
joint
committee,
it
is
possible
that
the
members
of
the
committee
and
then
of
counsel
are
open
to
changing
their
mind.
As
a
result
of
this,
it
is
my
opinion
that
the
standard
rules
that
the
city
has
for
revisiting
an
issue
do
not
properly
apply
to
a
case
such
as
this,
where
a
statutory
public
meeting
is
going
to
be
subsequently
held
and
therefore,
while
council
did
clearly
adopt
a
motion
with
respect
to
not
going
under
agricultural
lands
last
year.
I
It
is
in
order,
in
my
opinion,
for
committee
and
then
council
to
re-look
at
that,
because
of
the
pending
statutory
public
meeting.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
and
I
noticed
we
have
some
new
attendees
to
our
meeting.
Welcome,
just
letting
you
know
that
right
now
we're
asking
fairly
general
questions
that
we
had
a
lot
of
information
yesterday.
A
So
if
you
want
to
sign
up
to
talk
about
that,
we've
introduced
motions
that
we
know
of
if
anyone
has
motions
that
they
haven't
put
forward
yet
that
are
ready,
then
please
share
them
with
miss
stephanie,
so
we
can
all
see
them
and,
of
course,
the
public
that
is
watching
and
then,
after
we
finish
with
the
general
questions,
even
though
councilor
moffat
did
touch
on
some
of
the
motions
and
you're
welcome
to
do
so,
we
will
have
those
motions
read
out
again
and
introduced
as
to
why
each
of
the
movers
are
moving.
A
J
J
I
am
confused
about
what
that
is
going
to
be
in
light
of
the
exchange
that
mr
chown
had
with
us,
I'm
going
to
go
back
to
page
43,
where
mr
town
has
highlighted
that
the
intent
of
the
inner
boundary
would
be
to
contain
until
the
end
of
the
century,
all
future
urban
expansions
and
it
the
it
would
prohib
not
to
be
overtaken
by
future
urban
expansions.
J
I
think
the
intent
of
counselor
dudas's
direction
that
she's
seeking,
in
addition
to
some
of
the
discussion
that
we
heard
yesterday
around
this
simply
being
a
a
description
of
the
countryside,
leaves
me
wondering:
is
this
a
meaningful
protection
and
boundary
within
the
city?
What
does
the
goal
belt
if
we
approve
the
report?
The
way
it
is
today
mean,
and
what
does
it
mean
if
councilor
dudes's
motion
passes.
K
So,
madam
and
mr
chair,
the
gold
belt
is
both
a
growth
management
instrument,
basically
to
signal
that
the
city
will
not
expand
there
and
it
is,
at
the
same
time
a
continuation
of
the
policy
that
applies
to
those
lands,
and
that
applies
especially
to
the
private
property
owners
of
those
lands
as
per
the
designations
of
the
lands
today.
K
So
there
was
a
mention
that
mr
chan
picked
up
on
with
respect
to
possible
new
severance
policies
that
should
not
have
been
there.
We'll
clean
that
up,
whatever
severance
policies
apply
in
the
corresponding
designations
are
the
policies
that
will
continue
to
apply
under
the
corresponding
designations.
K
But
it's
basically
sending
the
signal
that,
as
the
city
looks
for
lands
in
the
future,
as
it
may
or
may
not
look
for
lands
in
the
future.
That
gold
belt
will
not
be
part
of
the
lands
that
are
looked
at
for
any
expansion
between
now
and
the
end
of
the
century.
That's
what
it
means.
K
The
prohibition
comes
with
the
policies
that
are
associated
with
the
designation,
so
basically
it's
agriculture,
resource
area,
it's
natural
environment,
natural
heritage
features
and
it's
all
the
policies
associated
with
the
the
protection
that
we
give
to
mineral
aggregate
designations
through
our
overlays
and
the
in
the
new
official
plan.
So
those
are
no-go
lands
already.
K
The
act
of
putting
them
in
a
belt
and
showing
them
on
a
map
is
basically
to
make
sure
that
by
seeing
this,
people
understand
that
the
city
will
not
be
pursuing
any
eating
into
those
lands
as
part
of
eventual
future
expansion
discussions
and
that
between
now
and
the
end
of
the
century,
if
there's
a
need
to
add
any
further
lands
to
the
urban
boundary,
those
lands
would
not
be
where
we
would
look
for
them.
J
J
Okay,
thank
you.
I
have
some
specific
questions
arising
out
of
the
discussions
yesterday
that
I
signaled
yesterday
that
I
did
want
to
take
a
closer
look
at
at
o'keefe
court.
It
was
rejected
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
you
can
explain
that
to
me
again.
J
L
Thanks
for
the
question
madame
mr
chair-
yes,
the
obviously
they
didn't
score
well
in
terms
of
proximity
to
existing
transit,
but
I
think
the
larger
issue-
and
I
can
have
chris
rogers
speak
to
this-
is-
is
actually
servicing.
L
The
city's
recently
done
extensive
work
in
that
area
in
terms
of
water
pressure
zones,
and
it
would
require
a
very
significant
change
to
that
recent
work
very
expensive
for
the
amount
of
lands
that
would
be
added.
So
primarily
it's
it's
there's.
Other
issues
in
terms
of
you
know
a
pump
station,
but
it's
the
higher
cost
of
servicing
those
lands
that
really
make
them
a
great
challenge.
J
L
That's
right:
we
believe
it
is
properly
slotted
as
category
2
lands
that
you
know
would
be
very
much
more
expensive
to
develop.
J
L
Yes,
it's
we
did
have
a
a
lot
of
back
and
forth
with
them.
We
are
adjusting
one
of
the
scores,
as
you
may
have
picked
up
on
in
the
staff
technical
motion.
It
does
not
change
the
the
ranking
from
category
two
as
currently
shown
to
category
one.
They
are.
They
are
close,
there's
other
challenges
with
with
those
lands.
In
terms
of
you
know,
connectivity,
wetland
impacts,
but
they
are,
they
are,
they
would
be
probably
the
highest
category
two
lands,
but
they
do
not
reach
category
one
based
on
okay.
J
And
so
again,
you
you
have
the
same
comfort
level
that
they
are
appropriately
categorized.
Yes,
we
do.
Okay,
I
have
a
sorry
I'll
raise
it
before.
I
forget
it,
because
I,
I
probably
will
the
technical
amendment
that
was
brought
forward
suggests
replacing
otrain
on
one
of
the
legends
with
otrain.
Is
that
a
mistake.
L
Very
very
minor:
it's
it's
capitalizing,
the
t
and
train,
and
I
believe
our
our
transportation
colleagues
were
just
to
have
that
branding
or
that
that
correction.
So.
J
Understood
I've
got
a
bit
more
prep
to
do
before.
I
start
delving
into
some
of
the
other
motions
that
have
been
brought
forward
so
chair
I'll,
move
on.
A
L
L
Yes,
that
currently
is
the
the
difference
or
the
missing
land
in
terms
of
the
recommendations
today,
270
hectares,
so
we
have
motions
before
us
that
exceed
270..
L
H
The
el
shantiri
motion
says,
cancel
out
any
expansion
in
south
march
and
take
the
land
that
was
allocated
to
that
and
put
it
to
taiwan
as
well.
The
me
in
motion
says:
take
land
that
was
recommended
south
of
river
road
and
riverside
south
out
and
take
that
land
and
put
it
adjacent
to
boseville
station.
So
if
all
those
motions
are
adopted,
the
effect
is
that
we
will
still
be
within
the
1281
that
council
adopted
last
year
and
we
are
not
exceeding
it.
H
Should
council
vary
from
that
ad
delete
just
like
a
budget
process,
then
we're
into
problems,
and
we
would
have
to
find
other
sources
for
that.
H
So
that
that
land
is
the
industrial
freight
and
storage,
where
there
is
no
pps
limitation
and
staff's
recommended
amount
of
industrial
freight
and
support
mr
foo
can
get
on
the
line
to
correct
me.
We
recommended
well
below
the
amount
that
we
recommended.
We
said
the
council,
we
gave
council
a
range
that
we
would
come
in
last
year
and
we're
well
below
that
number.
So
I
believe
we
are
still
within
the
number
and
staff
have
not,
as
I
said,
have
not
indicated
their
support
or
lack
of
support
for
that
application.
H
L
Okay,
mr
chair,
so
again,
just
so
we're
all
clear,
hypothetically
speaking,
if
all
motions
presented
today
pass,
we
would
still
be
respecting
the
direction
or
the
the
decision
that
city
council
made
in
2020.
H
L
A
K
Thank
you
chair.
So
councillor,
lieber
asked
about
one
specific
thing
that
came
up
yesterday
around
the
clearage
lands,
the
firm
break
lands
west
of
sittsville.
So
thank
you.
Councillor
leeper.
We
had
a
number
of
representatives
from
kavanaugh
and
I
think
ms
millens
brought
it
up
as
well.
K
K
Mr
madam
chair,
the
approvals
that
have
been
granted
in
the
past
remain
the
gold
belt
would
not
take
them
away.
So
if
there
is
country
law,
subdivisions
that
were
draft
approved
and
registered
prior
to
the
moratorium,
those
approvals
remain
in
place
and
the
gold
belt
changes
nothing
to
them.
K
Hey.
Thank
you
for
that
clarification.
I
probably
could
have
asked
this
when
we
were
talking
specifically
about
the
employment
lands
and
so
on,
but
the
carp
road
corridor
bia
brought
up
a
concern
about
economic
development
strategy
to
support
the
anticipated
growth
for
freight
and
industrial.
L
Thanks
for
the
question
yes,
certainly
there
is,
there
are
provisions
in
the
draft
official
plan
that
would
allow
you
know
consideration
for
that
corridor
in
the
long
term
to
be
serviced
if
it's
feasible
from
an
engineering
perspective
and
it's
financially
feasible,
so
that
that
opportunity
exists,
the
the
lands
we're
adding
in
proximity
at
the
417
interchange
in
carp
road
will
certainly
do
nothing
but
potentially
help
them
in
that
regard,
and
in
terms
of
the
economic
development
piece,
you
know
we
have
a
very
open
dialogue
with
with
the
bia
we
support
them.
L
K
Okay,
switching
gears
a
little
bit
here.
I
want
to
ask
the
same
question
to
staff
that
I
asked
to
the
delegation
from
taiwan,
which
is
I'm
looking
for
your
your
advice
or
your
perspective
on
how
our
planning
committee
and
council
should
consider
matters
of
reconciliation
and
indigenous
land
use
or
land
rights,
rather
in
the
overall
planning
process.
How
does
that
fit
in
very
open-ended
question?.
H
Taking
their
ownership
in
land
and
looking
for
economic
development
opportunities,
they
are
approaching
municipalities
such
as
vancouver
saskatoon,
winnipeg
and
others
for
the
opportunity
to
do
that
within
the
planning
frameworks
and
they're.
Looking
for
the
opportunity
to
take
some
role
in
the
planning
of
their
their
land,
I
don't
think
staff
can
tell
council
how
to
weigh
this
council
has
adopted
a
motion
related
to
reconciliation
and
you're.
We
are
doing
more
work
as
an
organization
to
understand
how
this
gets
woven
into
what
we
do,
but
it's
very
early
days.
H
K
Okay,
thank
you.
I
have
some
more
questions
about
the
motions
but
I'll
stop
there
and
maybe
come
back
to
that
a
little
bit
later,
once
we've
all
had
some
more
time
to
digest
them.
Thank
you,
sir.
C
Thank
you
very
much,
madam
chair,
a
question
to
you.
First
before
I
start,
I
have
a
series
of
questions
to
do
with
the
overall
strategy
and
everything:
do
you
want
those
questions
now
or
will
we
hold
them
to
the
the
later
meeting
and
just
deal
with
issues
today
around
the
the
map?
If
you
will
or
or
the
boundary
piece.
A
Well,
if
they're
general
questions
about
you
know
the
whole
process
etc,
you
should
be
put
them
speak
to
them.
Now,
if
they're
specific
to
a
specific
motion,
then
it
probably
is
easier
if
we
tie
it
in
when
we
go
back
to
the
motions,
but
really,
I
think
that
part
of
today
is
going
to
be
people
coming
back
and
forth
on
off.
Again,
as
as
you
know,
their
interest
is
peaked
or
they
think
of
another
question,
so
I
think
we're
pretty
flexible
for
that.
So
I
turn
it
back
to
you.
C
Okay,
thank
you,
then.
What
I'll
do
first
is
clarify
some
items
with
the
to
address
the
questions
on
my
two
motions,
one,
the
the
one
to
do
with
the
416
interchange
the
the
freight
lands
there.
C
I
fully
agree
with
councillor
moffat
that
we
need
to
get
that
second
report
to
clarify
before
we
go
forward
and
that's
why
I'm
not
doing
the
motion
to
bring
that
land
in
right
now
that
addresses
the
concerns
that
staff
have
raised
too,
but
we
also
have
to
recognize
that
people
are
going
through
the
the
process
that
we
have
set
out
to
have
their
lands
evaluated
and
to
make
sure
that
their
scoring
was
properly
done
and
everything,
because
this
is
such
a
huge
undertaking,
there's
always
opportunity
for
for
clarifications
to
correct
some
of
the
numbers
provided.
C
So
that's
the
purpose
of
both
of
the
directions
is
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
have
to
go
through
the
whole
judicial
process
to
fix
minor
things
that
staff
are
going
to
probably
fix
anyway.
For
example,
there's
been
a
couple
of
files
where
they've
already
changed
the
scoring
on
those
files
recognizing
new
information,
and
so
that's
the
purpose
of
those
two
motions
for
for
my
colleagues
to
know
what
we're
trying
to
address
here.
M
Privilege
can
we
get
the
motions
emailed
to
us
directly
that
were
tabled?
Do
we
have
all
those
I
I
just?
I
saw
them
on
the
screen,
but
I'd
love
to
refer.
You.
A
I
believe
I
believe
ms
stephanie
said
she
was
emailing
them
to
everyone.
Okay,
I
emailed.
C
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
okay,
so
that
addresses
those
concerns
that
basically,
what
what
I'm
trying
to
do
here
by
those
two
motions.
Some
of
my
questions
on
the
the
policy
piece
of
this
and
what
we're
using
for
a
framework
to
do
it.
I'd
like
to
get
additional
information
from
staff,
for
example
the
page
27
reference
to
suburban
transit.
C
Does
I
I
I'd
like
clarification,
whether
our
current
system
can
support
more
than
10
percent
electric
vehicles
in
this,
the
suburbs
or
even
downtown
for
that
matter,
and
how
many
home
chargers
our
current
system
can
support
and
who
will
pay
for
the
upgrades
to
that
system
if
we
decide
to
go
to
only
electric
vehicles
on
our
streets,
so
I
I
realize
that's
going
to
take
some
studying,
but
before
we
put
it
into
a
policy
and
say
this
is
what
we're
going
to
do.
H
Go
ahead
chair
on
that
very
specific
issue,
since
it's
I
think
less
tied
to
the
decision
today
and
more
tied
to
the
draft
official
pine
policies.
May
I
recommend
that
staff
take
that
issue
offline?
I
get
the
information
for
the
council
and
we'll
reply
after
today's
meeting,
since
I
don't
believe
it
it.
The
answer
that
question
affects
the
decisions
today,
unless
the
counselor
disagrees
with
me.
C
I
know
mr
wills,
that's
why
I
asked
a
question
at
the
start,
because
you
know
I've
shared
these
questions
with
staff.
I
my
concern
is
the
intensification
target.
If
we
cannot
deliver
what
we
set,
then
it
just
becomes
a
useless
target
and
I
really
need
a
lot
more
detail
on
how
we're
going
to
do
that
in
existing
neighborhoods,
which
is
basically
what
intensification
is.
C
You
know,
there's
there's
things
that
go
beyond
planning
when
we
start
talking
about
converting
the
whole
system
to
vehicles
and
everything,
electric
vehicles
and
and
changing
the
transit
standards,
and
all
that
as
part
of
a
planning
document
versus
being
done
at
the
transit
commission.
So
I'm
more
than
happy
to
to
take
your
suggestion
and
wait
as
long
as
we
get
it
done
before.
We
approve
the
the
final
plan
later
this
year.
E
Thank
you
councillor.
Probably
next
we
have
counselor
kids.
N
Thank
you
chair.
I
have
a
lot
of
questions
so
feel
free
to
cut
me
off
if
you
need
to-
and
I
can
get
back
on
the
list
later,
I'm
curious
to
learn
more
about
the
gating
criteria
that
the
category
1
and
2
lands
would
be
subject
to
in
our
current
system
the
growth
that
growth
pays
for
growth
by
way
of
development
charges.
N
So
I
think
it's
causing
cynicism
that
the
gating
criteria
will
have
any
real
effect
in
rectifying
our
current
and
future
infrastructure
challenges.
So
my
question
is:
what
is
your
plan
for
ensuring
that
there
is
funding
available
to
ensure
that
the
criteria
is
realized
in
advance
of
putting
shovels
in
the
ground.
H
So
cherries,
are
we
working,
I
hate
to
say
it,
an
imperfect
system
where
the
legislation
the
province
is
set
for
us
that
collects
development
charges.
There
is
a
built-in
lag.
The
council
uses
exactly
the
right
term
to
describe
what
happens.
Is
we
identify
something
in
a
plan
in
order
to
get
the
money
to
actually
build
it?
H
We
actually
have
to
have
units
under
construction
that
contribute
their
development
charges
which
contribute
to
the
infrastructure
and
there's
a
built-in
lag
and
around
the
city
and
and
the
city
is
also
in
our
last
development
charges
by
law.
We
had
to
update
the
our
cost
projections
and
our
estimates
of
the
both
project
rate
and
the
cost
of
projects
and
we're
always
playing
a
game
of
catch-up
on
this.
H
So
really,
what
we're
recommending
in
the
report
is
that
we
tie
improvements
that
will
be
evaluated
in
the
transportation
master
plan,
particularly
to
the
inform
the
secondary
plans
about
what
upgrades
should
happen
in
what
order
and
that
will
also
feed
into
the
development
charges
by
law.
I
don't
know
that
I
can
guarantee
will
ever
be
in
a
fiscally
easy
situation
with
these
infrastructure
upgrades
because,
as
I
said,
the
legislation
that
governs
this
sets
a
lagging
in
it.
H
H
N
I'm
wondering
if
the
fact
that
one
of
the
biggest
barriers
to
improving
the
transportation
infrastructure
in
this
area
is
that
we're
in
a
complete
stalemate
with
the
ncc
over
extending
brian
coburn
and
the
brt
route
that
would
run
in
parallel
to
it.
So
was.
Was
this
taken
into
consideration
in
the
scoring
because
well,
I
can
appreciate
that
there
are
other
parts
of
the
city
where
infrastructure
updates
are
required
in
advance
of
future
growth.
L
Thank
you
for
the
question.
The
scoring
in
terms
of
transportation
is
based
on
either
existing
or
planned
transit.
So
the
short
answer
is
no.
It
would
not
impact
that
scoring
because
it
is
a
planned
transit
network,
but
it
does
lead
into
the
need,
for
you
know
that
gating
or
those
preconditions
before
development
can
happen.
N
Okay,
do
you
have
any
sense-
and
I
know
that
this
is
probably
not
a
perfect
question?
Do
you
have
any
sense
of
the
timeline
as
to
when
we
would
see
the
category
one
and
two
lands,
or
specifically
the
category?
One
lands
begin
to
get
developed
since
there
is
still
undeveloped
land
within
the
current
urban
boundary.
H
Have
lands
in
that
were
approved
in
2013
that
were
advanced
very
rapidly.
We
had
lands
that,
for
example,
in
the
fern
bank
area
that
where
they
had
all
the
approvals
in
place
and
were
able
to
proceed
to
subdivision
level
and
they
didn't
because
of
economic
conditions,
so
it
depends
a
lot
on
economic
cycles,
but
there
is
probably
a
lag
of
several
years.
Any
of
these
lands
can
come
in
because
we
have
to
do
master
servicing
work.
We
have
to
do
transportation,
mass
transportation
work
we
have
to
deal
with.
H
You
know
the
area,
specific
development
charges
for
storm
water
works.
We
have
to
deal
with
a
number
of
other
factors,
including
the
community
design
plans.
So
you
know
anything.
That's
approved
today
is
unlikely
to
come
in
within
five
years
and
much
of
what
we're
going
to
be
relying
on
right
now
for
the
15-year
land
supply
stuff
that
was
approved
in
the
prior
round.
So
we're
we're.
You
know
five.
C
N
N
Okay,
thank
you
I'll
shift
now
to
obviously
I've
got
lots
of
concerns
about
the
south
orleans
lands,
but
I'll
switch
areas
so
for
clarification
for
some
rural
residents
that
have
reached
out
to
say
that
they
believe
that
their
land
is
currently
zone
agricultural
but
is
not
conducive
to
quality
farming.
L
Thank
you
for
the
question.
No,
there
is
a
process
under
the
planning
act
in
terms
of
official
plan,
amendment
applications
and
we've
seen
those
before
there's
nothing.
That
would
prevent
a
landowner
from
going
through
that
process
and
applying.
N
Okay,
that
was
my
understanding,
but
I
just
wanted
everyone
listening
to
get
the
same
clarification
I'm
almost
through
my
questions
here.
So
I'm
also
wondering
is
if
a
review
of
expanding
the
boundaries
of
smaller
rural
villages,
namely
vars,
was
explored
in
this
review.
L
We're
actually
not
looking
at
village
expansions
as
part
of
this
urban
boundary
discussion.
There
is
a
process
set
forward
in
the
draft
official
plan
that
contemplates
and
sets
out
how
those
village
expansions
can
occur,
so
we're
certainly
not
excluding
them,
but
we're
we're
not
considering
as
part
of
this
this
process.
L
Yes,
following
the
official
plan,
there's
a
number
of
villages
where
we
know
you
know
that
will
be
pursued
following
this
new
official
plan.
Yes,.
N
Okay
and
then
last
my
last
question:
for
now
the
there's
a
the
parcel
in
orleans
north
that
is
north
of
old
montreal
road.
There
is
existing
estate.
Lots
in
that
area,
so
is
it?
Is
it
in
your
view
that
these
existing
lots
will
receive
municipal
servicing
as
part
of
this
expansion.
L
They
may
have
the
ability
to
connect
to
municipal
servicing.
If
it's
you
know
approximate
to
their,
you
know
their
residences.
Quite
often
we
see
that
there's
cost-sharing
arrangements
or
local
improvement
opportunities
for
those
residents,
so
there
would
be.
I
would
categorize
it
as
an
opportunity
to
connect.
H
Yeah,
a
counselor
you're,
raising
a
very
complicated
question.
There's
no
easy
answer
to
so
you
know
a
lot
of
it
has
to
do
with
the
services
that
are
available.
This
issue
has
there
are
rural
effectively
real
estate
subdivisions
that
were
swallowed
up
with
urbanization.
Over
the
years
I
mean
there's
some
unusual
ones.
Counselor
aglai
has
an
area
in
his
ward.
That
was
once
a
real
estate
subdivision
of
the
urban
area.
Their
council,
chair,
harder,
has
one
in
her
area
and
they
they
all,
have
to
be
dealt
with
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
H
It's
a
complicated
question
about
what
services
they
get
and
what
taxes
they
pay.
I
think
it
will,
if
you
don't
mind
I'll,
take
this
offline,
mr
mark,
and
I
will
come
talk
to
you
about
what
that
future
might
mean
what
the
various
choices
and
routes
would
be
for
that.
N
E
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
council,
kids
and
next
speaker
is
council
menard.
So
any
council
need
to
go
back.
They
can
just
put
their
hands
out
and
now
we're
just
going
to
go
in
order
who
comes
first,
councilman.
M
Thank
you
very
much
chair.
I
have
several
questions
as
well.
The
first
one
is
around
finances.
Staff
have
laid
out
a
fairly
robust
process
presented
for
determining
the
cost
of
potential
new
lands
to
be
included.
That's
the
the
270
hectares
and
where
those
those
might
come
from
and
and
the
cost
that
those
could
produce
over
the
years
is
determined
that
we
want
to
see
those
produced
and
staff
have
laid
out
a
process
to
do
that.
We
have
costs
identified
as
as
high
very
high
estimates.
M
In
you
know
some
of
the
water
wastewater
infrastructure
for
some
of
the
the
lands
that
are
being
270
hectares,
for
example,
and
so
my
question
to
staff
is:
how
can
the
public
be
provided
and
counselor
be
provided
more
information
about
the
the
cost
of
expansion
in
the
other
proposed
areas,
the
the
current
1000
new
hectares
that
are
being
proposed
for
past
one
and
past
two?
H
So
so
chairs,
in
the
background,
information
that
we
have
done,
both
transportation
and
servicing
staff
have
looked
at
every
person
landed
as
part
of
their
scoring
about
ease
to
which
they
can
be
serviced.
So
there
is
information
that
staff
has
available
I'll
talk
to
mr
herger
and
find
out
how
we
can
we
can
make
that
it
is
inherent
in
the
scoring
that
if
things
were
extremely
expensive,
they
scored
lower.
In
this
you
know,
mr
rogers,
chris
rogers
team
looked
at
all
kinds
of
servicing
related
issues.
H
We
got
outside
expertise
on
geotechnical
conditions
in
many
areas,
and
so
the
transportation
staff
know
well
based
on
the
capacity
and
system
proximity
to
the
network
and
the
like.
So
this
is
there
the
we'll
we'll
go
back,
because
I
understand
your
concern,
we'll
figure
out
a
way
to
make
that
available.
M
Okay,
thank
you
for
that,
and
I
know
edmonton
had
done
a
study
on
this
previously
and-
and
you
know,
the
the
sort
of
ongoing
public
costs
over
50
years
were
were
10.6
billion.
There
were
some
differences,
they
were
adding
a
similar
amount
of
people.
Actually
that
was
half
that
was
195
000,
we're
talking
about
400
thousand
those
195
000
people
being
added
to
their
city,
obviously
different
neighborhoods,
but
there's
some
similarities
between
edmonton
and
ottawa.
Do
you
see
similarities
in
that?
M
H
If
council
were
to
direct
just
to
get
a
further
study,
we
could
we'd
have
to
find
a
funding
source
for
that.
That's
not
part
of
the
official
plan
budget
and
we
also
have
responsibility
to
make
the
timelines
councils
established.
The
detailed
information
the
council
is
looking
for
will
really
come
out
in
the
transportation
master
plan
in
the
infrastructure
master
plan
when
we
actually
are
designing
the
exact
changes,
doing
much
more
detailed
cost
estimates
at
that
stage.
M
Okay,
that's
helpful.
I
I
think
it
would
be
great
to
get
a
rough
estimate
of
how
many
billions
this
is
going
to
cost
ottawa
over
over
the
next
several
decades,
so
that
people
know
what
that
the
decision,
we're
making
has
has
huge
cost
implications
and
having
an
actual
dollar
figure
on
it
would
be.
You
know,
as
an
estimate
would
be,
would
be
very
helpful.
M
M
We
say
that
on
page
52
of
the
report
that
the
targets
are
being
that
could
be
met
or
exceeded
and
the
land
supply
could
be
adequate
to
2046
or
more,
and
so,
if
we
are
exceeding
our
our
targets,
early
on
will
staff
consider
amendments
to
the
amount
of
land
needed
or
supposedly
needed
to
meet
the
end
target.
What
will
you
do
if,
if
we're
seeing
higher
than
anticipated
intensification
targets
or
numbers.
K
Mr
madam
chair,
that
would
be
the
subject
of
the
review
that
we
would
undertake
in
2026.
We
would
still
be
under
the
approved
growth
management
strategy.
So
obviously,
if
the
intensification
target
is
is
going
better
than
anticipated,
it
means
that
the
land
supply
would
would
last
theoretically
longer,
but
council
can
direct
at
that
time.
M
Okay,
that's
helpful.
The
the
270
hectares
then
could
be
considered.
I
guess
at
that
time,
if
we
are
in
advance
of
our
our
targets
with
that
split,
so
appreciate
that
on
the
gold
belt
there
there
are
several.
You
know
donut
holes,
that
we
see
there's
a
significant
amount
of
space
between
the
gold
belt
and
the
green
belt.
I
think
I
heard
councilor
moffett
say
about
eight
thousand
hectares
there.
M
What
what
is
the
the
policy
tool
that
would
actually
help
make
sure
the
gold
belt
is
sustained
over
time.
I've
heard
the
conversation
with
councillor
lieber
and
others,
but
but
what
policy
tool
would
actually
make
this
a
reality
rather
than
sort
of
the
assurances
we're
getting?
Is
there
a
policy
tool
that
could
be
used
and
developed.
K
There
is
no
policy
tool
at
this
time
that
we're
recommending
this
would
be
a
direction
that
council
would
provide
to
staff,
and
we
would
come
back
with
that
as
part
of
the
official
plan
in
june
for
the
statutory
public
meetings.
M
Can
you
say
that
last
part
again,
you'd
come
back
in
june
with
with
which
sorry,
mr
mcgillis,
I
missed
that.
M
Okay.
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
My
next
question
is
around
around
climate
change
and
the
implications
for
our
city
with
with
some
of
these
lands
are.
Are
there
differences
in
the
land
parcels
being
selected
for
climate
change,
and
I
asked
this
both
with
either
meeting
our
our
targets
that
we
have
in
our
climate
change
master
plan
or
not.
M
If
we
don't
meet
those
target,
they're
very
ambitious,
if
we're
not
meeting
them,
are
there
implication
differences
between
the
the
the
land
parcels
that
we
have
out
there
for
for
our
climate
change
initiatives
and
our
goals?
If
staff
could
elaborate
on
that.
K
The
designation
of
land
in
and
of
itself
does
not
affect
emissions.
What
affects
emissions
is
how
we
are
heating
and
cooling
buildings
and
how
the
transportation
fleet
moves
around.
So
those
would
be
the
main
ways
through
which,
through
which
emissions
would
be
reduced
to
meet
the
council
targets.
Land
in
and
of
itself
does
not
contribute
emissions.
M
Yes,
yeah,
absolutely
it's
the
it's
the
actions
after
you
build
that
land,
so
people
having
to
say
build
a
road
through
the
green
belt
or
to
drive
into
their
their
job
if
it
happens
to
be
in
the
core
versus
where
they
are
right
now
so
just
concerned
about
that,
as
an
implication.
For
some
of
these,
we
mentioned
that
this.
This
is
likely
going
to
be
the
last
major
addition
in
terms
of
urban
boundary
expansion
in
document
one.
M
We
say
that
so
the
the
exact
wording
I'm
trying
to
find
here,
but
it
it
it's
proposed
to
be
the
last
major
addition
in
terms
of
our
greenfield
expansion.
Can
you
just
clarify
if
that's
the
that
is
the
intent
that
this
this
urban
boundary
expansion
we've
got
in
front
of
us
is
going
to
be
the
last
large
big
expansion
that
we
anticipate
in
our
city.
H
Council
chairs,
if
I
may
take
that
you
know
we're
in
a
process
of
very
substantial
change
in
our
approach
I
mean
ottawa's
picked
the
most
aggressive
intensification
target
of
other
major
cities.
I
mean
the
the
example
that
the
council
raised
about
edmonton
edmonton,
evaluated
higher
numbers
and
only
went
with
50
hamilton's
violated,
evaluated
higher
numbers
and
only
went
with
50
percent.
The
province
had
used
to
mandate
the
trump
greater
toronto
area
having
60
and
they
lowered
it
to
50,
because
the
municipalities
in
and
around
toronto
said
it
was
unachievable.
H
So
ottawa
has
set
the
highest
of
major
cities
in
canada:
intensification
targeted
60.
We
need
a
wholesale
change
in
the
product
that
building
industry
is
offering
in
ottawa
to
achieve
that,
and
we
need
a
wholesale
change
in
the
demand
for
units
that
are
different
than
single-family
housing
or
what
you
find
in
the
suburban
communities.
We
need
people
to
change
what
they
want
as
well.
So
everything
depends
on
both
those
things
happening.
It
depends
on
a
change
in
demand
and
a
change
in
the
supply.
That's
available,
and
you
know
if
we
are
more
successful
over
time.
H
H
We
need
24
percent,
more
built
dwelling
units
inside
what's
already
built
today
in
the
full
urban
area
of
the
city,
so
we
need
to
fit
24
percent,
more
housing
units
in
in
every
neighborhood
in
the
city,
basically
or
in
some
distributed
manner,
in
order
to
accomplish
six
percent.
H
So
I'm
a
big
believer
in
lofty
ambitious
goals,
but
this
is
very
ambitious.
If
we
exceed
it,
you
know
that'll,
be
you
know,
people
who
are
in
this
role
down
the
road
future
councils
will
have
the
benefit
of
that
decision,
but
we
have
to
monitor
it
very
carefully
because
it
is
extremely
ambitious.
M
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
There
is
a
mention
of
employment
lands
in
here
recommendation
10
calls
for
the
conversion
of
lands
in
an
industrial
area
in
the
richmond
secondary
plan
to
non-industrial.
I
understand,
there's,
there's
area
specific
policy
for
the
area
that
would
be
included,
I'm
just
on
a
broader
sense.
How
often
do
approved
industrial
or
employment
lands
get
changed
back
over
to
residential.
H
Jersey,
if
I
may
and
royce,
will
back
me
up
on
this,
the
provincial
policy
statement
makes
it
extremely
difficult
to
make
that
change,
and
it
can
only
occur
during
a
comprehensive
review
such
so.
It
must
occur
now
it
can't
occur
as
an
application
like
you
would
see
an
official
plan
amendment
for
a
new
height
in
your
award.
For
example.
H
It's
not
the
same.
It
only
can
happen
when
municipalities
do
comprehensive
reviews
and
the
bar
is
extremely
high
and
the
province
wants
to
protect
the
employment
lands
in
the
province
for
for
for
jobs
and
activity
and
what
we
need
and
they're
hard
to
replicate
once
we
lose
them.
But
that
being
said,
we
acknowledge
in
this
comprehensive
review.
There
are
a
number
of
previously
designated
employment
lens
they're,
not
particularly
suitable,
and
they
make
really
good
opportunities
for
infill
and
replacement
and
meeting
our
housing
need,
which
does
lower.
H
A
Okay,
that's
that's
your
time
right
now,
councilor
menard,
so
I
know
you're
gonna.
You
know
you
know
the
routine
here
I
don't
have
to
tell
you
counselor
gower
counselor,
leaper,
counselor,
mckenny,.
K
Thank
you
chair.
I
guess
I
wanted
to
dig
in
on
on
counselor
tierney's
motion
on
the
taiwan
lands.
I
have
a
friendly
amendment
and
I
just
want
to
tell
you
why
I
wanted
to
introduce
this.
K
I
think
that
I
think
the
taiwan
lands
is
a
really
compelling
proposal
and
we
heard
a
lot
about
that
yesterday
and-
and
I
think
I
I
said
to
the
delegation-
it's
it's-
it's
not
proven
it's
compelling,
but
it's
not
proven
and
just
going
through
some
of
the
the
notes
from
staff
and
some
of
my
notes
from
the
meetings.
K
There's
a
lot
of
challenges,
a
lot
of
risk
with
that
particular
piece
of
land,
the
the
cost
for
servings
servicing.
It
is
high.
It's
on
sensitive
clay,
there's
geotechnical
risk,
there's
earthquake
risk,
long-term
settlement
risk.
Obviously
there's
some
big
costs
involved
in
serving
it
with
rapid
transit.
There's
unclassified
wetland
nearby,
there's
there's
a
lot
of
risk
around
it
and
I
wanted
to
introduce
a
friendly
amendment
to
councillor
tierney.
K
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
if,
if,
if
we're
approaching
this
piece
of
land,
the
way
that
I'm
reading
the
motion
that
we're
not
giving
carte
blanche
to
develop
without
consideration
of
the
cost
to
our
municipality,
so
I'll
need
to
find
it
in
my
many
emails
coming
in
here
today.
But
it's
a
very
simple
motion
that
reads
sorry:
a
very
simple
friendly
amendment.
K
I
appreciate
that
in
the
motion
there's
already
a
mention
of
provincial
and
federal
funding,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
some
some
very
clear
conditions
in
place
within
the
official
plan
policy
and
otherwise
so
that
we're
not
putting
the
cart
before
the
horse
so
that
we're
not
giving
carte
blanche
to
to
infrastructure
spending
without
having
a
source
on
how
to
actually
achieve
that.
A
K
J
A
high-level
question
for
staff
that
I
I
think
we
need
to
understand.
I
mean
I've.
I've
come
into
this
process,
it's
my
first
urban
boundary
expansion
and
you
know.
While
I
opposed,
I
opposed
an
expansion
of
the
urban
boundary,
but
today
we're
being
asked
to
add
parcels.
J
That
is
the
the
the
question
that
is
before
us
and
in
general,
if
we
are
going
to
have
an
urban
boundary
expansion,
I
tend
to
accept
the
the
conventional
wisdom
that
that
is
best
accomplished
by
having
parcels
of
land
added
that
are
contiguous
to
the
current
area
that
are
as
close
to
the
the
core
area
as
possible
in
order
to
minimize
the
number
of
kilometers
that
are
being
driven,
and
I
I've
been
trusting
that
staff
have
undertaken
a
good,
thorough
analysis
of
the
the
various
parcels
that
they've
been
asked
to
add
to
minimize
and
mitigate
those
impacts
of
expansion
both
for
the
taxpayer
and
for
with
respect
to
climate
change.
J
The
rigor
is
important
to
me.
I,
like
the
mechanistic
approach
that
staff
have
taken
to
this
issue,
we're
being
asked
today
to
consider
some
motions
that
move
beyond
the
rigor
that
staff
have
applied
to
the
certainly
the
the
past
one
past
two
lands
is
this,
in
fact,
are
we
are
we
at
liberty
to
do
whatever
we
want?
J
Are
there
roots
for
challenges
based
on
not
sticking
to
our
methodology
that
exists
for
the
developers,
those
who
feel
that
their
parcels
have
been
passed
over
inappropriately
based
on
the
approach
the
council
has
agreed
to?
Are
there?
A
I
The
of
course,
as
members
of
the
joint
committee
are
well
aware,
the
official
plan
is
subject
to
the
approval
by
the
minister
and
therefore
any
person
is
free
to
make
submissions
to
the
minister
after
the
plan
has
been
approved,
to
seek
to
have
modifications
made
by
the
minister.
So
that
is
one
possible
avenue
there
are.
There
is
no
appeal
to
local
planning
appeal
tribunal
that
has
been
removed.
I
There
is
always
a
prospect
of
a
challenge
to
the
courts.
One
cannot
remove
that
possibility.
If
someone
were
making
a
challenge.
In
my
opinion,
it
would
have
to
be
on
the
basis
of
inconsistency
with
the
provincial
policy
statement.
I
I
Having
said
all
that,
in
my
opinion,
it's
going
to
be
a
much
higher
bar
for
a
child,
a
successful
challenge
to
be
made
to
the
courts
than
has
traditionally
been
been
the
case
in
front
of
local
planning
appeal
tribute.
J
So
what
extent
does
quantitative
analysis
of
the
options
before
us
serve
as
a
proxy
for
adherence
to
the
provincial
policy
statement?
If
we've
designed
that
methodology
to
best
achieve
the
outcomes
that
we
want
from
the
provincial
policy
statement,.
H
So
chairs
I'm
going
to
answer
this.
I'm
sure
mr
mark
can
intelligently
supplement
what
I
have
to
say.
So.
First
of
all,
I
I
think
it's
fair
to
say
some
counselors
have
asked
me
this
question.
In
the
past
I
mean
the
expansion
is
of
both
a
nerd
and
a
science.
It's
a
science
particularly
about
where
not
to
build.
So
we
have
experts
on
stuff
like
oh
and
others,
easily
tell
you
where
environmental
plans
goes
out
and
they're,
not
considerations.
H
We
have
there's
more
of.
A
An
art
about
what
comes
in
mr
willis-
yes,
I
don't
know
if
everybody
just
heard
you
going,
but
could
you
just
repeat
the
last
minute,
please,
okay,
thank.
H
So
I
think
I
have
explained
to
a
couple
of
counselors
that
there's
an
art
and
a
science
involved
with
making
an
urban
boundary
expansion
decision.
The
science
is
where
not
to
build,
and
we
have
experts
on
staff
like
mr
stowe,
who
can
tell
you,
where
there's
environmentally
sensitive
land,
that
should
not
be
candidates
for
growth.
We
take
that
very
seriously.
H
The
five
big
moves
which
council
has
adopted
in
terms
of
its
goals
in
giving
a
scoring
system
and
the
city
of
ottawa,
has
used
the
scoring
system
since
amalgamation
to
try
to
referee
the
process
of
who
comes
in
and-
and
it
has
worked
in
the
past
for
the
most
part
in
defense
in
in
appeals
previously
on
the
ontario
municipal
board,
but
not
entirely.
H
So
we
still
always
have
to
link
things
back
to
the
core
of
consistency
with
the
provincial
policy
statement
and,
as
mr
mark
said,
that
ultimately
is
the
test
and
whatever
and
council
has
a
lot
of
latitude
to
make.
Whichever
decision
it
chooses
provided
that
decision
is
consistent
with
the
provincial
policy
statement.
J
J
They
are
contiguous
to
the
existing
urban
boundary
which
minimizes
you
know
some
of
the
distances
that
people
need
to
travel
fewer
kilometers
per
vehicle,
traveled,
there's
a
there's,
a
really
clear
congruence
between
the
south
march
lands
and
the
provincial
policy
statement
that
may
not
be
there
with
the
taywin
lands
in
riverside
south.
J
I'm
I'm
really
struggling
to
reconcile
replacing
the
cat
two
lands
with
prime
agricultural
land.
You
know
the
the
scoring
is
the
the
council
direction
that
we
avoid
agricultural
land
strikes
me
as
being
in
congruence
with
the
provincial
policy
statement.
J
Swapping
the
lands
out
does
not
inspire
me
that
it's
a
particularly
rigorous
decision
and
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
how
bulletproof
we
are
at
the
courts
if
we
are
challenged
on
on
those
moves.
I
Madam
chair,
mr
chair
I'll,
start
off,
and
then
the
general
manager
may
wish
to
add.
Clearly
there
has
to
be
a
rationale.
Staff
have
provided
recommendations
to
you,
based
on
consistency
with
provincial
policy
statement
based
on
the
directions
that
council
gave
last
year
and
to
the
extent
that
one
is
going
to
change
from
that,
there
needs
to
be
a
rationale
behind
it.
If
there
is
a
solid
rash
now
behind
it,
you
know
I
will
never
promise
chairs
that
we
are
bulletproof
in
front
of
the
courts.
I
J
I'm
gonna
yield
the
floor
for
the
moment.
Chair
I'll,
be
I'll,
be
back
in
a
bit.
A
I'm
sure
you
will-
and
I
would
say
now
after
a
long
wait,
counselor
mckenny
your
turn
and
followed
by
councilman
art,
and
I
don't
see
any
others
up
here
before
you
start
cat
councilman
kenny.
A
I
don't
see
any
other
hands
here
so
on
the
general
questions
before
we
go
to
motions,
if
you
have
more
so
counselor
leaper,
that
might
be
you,
for
example,
you
want
to
hold
on
or
whomever
now
would
be
a
really
good
time
and
if
anyone
has
any
motions
in
hand
at
this
point,
please
send
them
over
to
melody.
Thank
you.
Counselor
mckenny.
O
Thank
you
chair.
I
may
come
back
to
some
of
my
questions
on
motions,
but
I
think
that
the
questions
I
have
now
probably
will
satisfy
some
of
the
things
on
some
of
the
answers.
I'm
looking
for,
I'm
just
struck
by
the
fact
that
yesterday
we
had
several
landowners
come
to
committee,
arguing
that
you
know
their
land
should
have.
You
know
been
above
that
threshold
that
14
point
threshold
and
when
I
think
about
today
the
the
taiwan
lands.
O
L
Adam
mr
chair,
in
terms
of
a
numerical
score,
any
category
three
lands
would
score
very
low
just
based
on
the
nature
of
their
location.
It's
all
based
on
proximity
to
existing
services,
existing
infrastructure
and
planned
or
existing
transit.
O
Do
you
have
the
servicing
scores
for
the
taiwan
lands?
Do
we
know
what
they
are.
L
The
overall
I'm
sure
we
could
pull
them
out.
The
issue
with
that
area
is
there's
hundreds
of
different
land
parcels
and
the
parcels
are,
you
know
multiple,
but
we
could
give
you
a
range,
but
they
would
be
zero
or
very
low.
O
Okay,
is
it
possible
to
get
those
before
well
within
the
next
day
or
two
just
so
that
we
have
those
as
we're.
A
We're
going
to
just
I
think
I
didn't
mention
this
today,
but
february
10th
is
the
council
date,
so
that
gives
staff
time.
H
H
No
just
let's,
let's
with
respect
council,
I
want
to
parse
the
words.
Capacity
exists
in
the
entire
system
to
service
the
growth
projected
in
the
official
plan
they're
with
the
it's
it's
the
availability
of
a
pipe
to
connect
to
that's
the
prom.
O
Yeah,
okay
of
the
taylon
lands.
I
know
that
a
lot
of
it
is
encumbered
by
natural
heritage
features.
O
L
Yes,
we
actually
have
a
slide.
We
could
bring
up.
That
shows
the
you
know,
the
lands
that
are
owned
by
the
algonquins
and
I'll
just
get
the
number
for
for
melody
of
the
slide.
L
O
And
and
other
penalties,
what
were
some
of
the
other
penalties
that
brought
down
the
score
for
the
taylor
lands?
I
understand
it's,
it's
it's
poor
soil
conditions,
so
I
just
want
to
understand
how
poor
those
soil
conditions
are
and,
given
the
you
know,
the
the
quality
that
the
clay-based
soils.
O
How
can
we
know
that
affordable
construction
can
happen
that
will
allow
for
density
anything
over
four
stories
if
we
have
such
poor
soil.
H
So
chairs
older
geotechnical
reports
and
they
go
back
many
many
years-
suggest
the
soil
conditions
in
that
area
are
poor.
They
are
there,
they
are
marine
clays
and
there
would
have
been
penalties
applied
in
the
scoring
for
there
being
marine
clays
with
the
the
group
behind
the
table
and
proposal
is
submitting
new
geotechnical
information
to
us,
and
you
know
I
think
it
it's
a
very
it's
a
vast
area.
There
will
be
variability
within
it.
H
We,
you
know
we
have
marine
clays
in
in
much
of
the
southeast
area,
so
in
council
kits
ward,
for
example,
there
are
marine
clay
soils
in
that
area
as
well,
so
it
is
an
area
we
need
to
study
more
fully.
We
need
more
information.
We
are
relying
on
older
information
and
we've
just
received
to
said
relatively
new
information.
We
need
more
time
to
understand
that,
but
it
does
add
to
construction
costs.
It
certainly
does
and
that's
what
staff
have
flagged
in
the
background
document
to
the
report.
O
But
you
today,
presumably
maybe
thursday
and
us
in
two
weeks,
are
being
asked
to
make
a
decision
on
a
motion
that
would,
you
know,
add
270
hectares
plus
the
past
one
category,
one
lens
into
this.
H
Counselors
I
mean
staff
have
presented
you,
the
information
we
have
and
the
new
information
will
refine.
That
I
mean,
I
think
staff
we've
scored
this
and
presented.
It
represents
historic
information
and
it
does
represent
probably
the
worst
case
scenario.
Understanding.
The
proponents
feel
that
the
information
we've
relied
on
is
overly
pessimistic
and
they
want
to
make
the
case
to
us
that
it's
better
than
than
the
old
information
we've
been
relying
on,
and
you
know
this
area
is
buildable.
We
are
building
in
in
cumberland
area.
H
On
marine
clay
soils
there
are
marine
clay
soils
in
other
parts
of
the
city
as
well,
but
staff
are
not
denying
that
there
are
additional
construction
costs
both
to
in
the
building
of
infrastructure,
which
would
you
know,
presumably
be
allocated
to
the
development
costs
or
the
development
charges,
and
then
they'll
they'll
have
higher
costs
when
they're
building
their
their
buildings
in
that
area.
So
we're
not
we're
not
denying
that
chairs
it's.
It
is
a
higher
cost
than
on
other
areas.
H
O
Thanks,
I
think,
with
respect,
I'm
not
sure
that
you
answered
my
question
so
back
in
the
70s.
When
you
know
the
region
was
picking
lands
outside
the
urban
boundary
at
the
time
you
know
developing
canada
bar
haven
orleans.
O
O
So
I'm
just
I'm
asking
if
we
have,
if
you
as
as
head
of
our
planning,
feel
that
we
have
the
information
that
we
need
to
make
this
decision
today,
based
on
the
geotechnical
information,
we
have.
H
O
Yeah,
but
the
motion
now
is
adding
you
know
category
one
lands
into
this
and
and
expanding
it,
so
I'm
yeah,
okay
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
I
think
you,
you
have
answered
it
a
few
times.
O
I
guess
my
my
last
question
is,
and
I
I
think
I
think
counselor
leaper
asked
it
as
well,
but
I'm
gonna
re-ask
it
you
know
is
the
is
the
decision
that
we're
being
asked
to
make
you
today,
as
as
committee
members
and
all
of
us
at
council,
you
know,
including
the
the
you
know,
the
south
march
lands
into
the
taywin
land
is
this.
Is
this
decision
to
include
those
lands
in
the
taiwan
lands
consistent
with
the
provincial
policy
statement.
H
Here's
the
provincial
policy
statement
is
not
a
linear
path
to
an
answer
and
a
lot
of
questions
and
chairs.
Many
counselors
will
have
seen
that
in
files
in
their
awards
it
represents
a
whole
series
of
competing
public
interests
that
all
have
to
be
balanced
against
each
other
and
ultimately,
elected
councils
have
to
make
up
their
minds
how
you
weigh
the
different
challenges.
H
The
provincial
policy
statement
does
encourage
development,
that's
contiguous,
but
it
also
allows
communities
to
take
advantage
of
infrastructure
for
17
highways.
It
allows
it.
You
know
it
allows
you
to
prioritize
roads.
You
know-
and
there
are
a
number
of
different
decisions
in
here.
So
as
long
as
the
imbalance
council
has,
if,
in
all
of
this
collective
decisions
on
what
to
add,
meets
the
provincial
policy
statement.
Mr
mark
and
I
have
indicated
that
yes,
people
may
challenge
it
and
the,
but
the
minister
will
determine
first
and
foremost
whether
they
feel
they
have.
H
We
have
met
the
provincial
policy
statement
and
it's
the
minister's
decision
that
gets
challenged
potentially
in
court,
not
councils.
So
that's,
ultimately
the
the
path
before
council
today,
and
I
do
believe
that
council
has
a
right.
More
than
it
has
in
the
past
because
of
the
no
longer
having
appeals
to
balance
the
provincial
policy
statement
competing
tests,
as
you
see
best
for
ottawa
as
the
elected
representatives.
O
Thank
you.
I
guess
that's
the
end
of
my
questions.
I
don't
know
a
chair
if
the
the
map
is
available
just
to
show
how
much
of
the
land
is
actually
algonquin
homeland.
L
Yes,
we
do
have
the
the
maps,
madam
chair,
so
this
is
the
broader
area
that
we've
been
referring
to
as
a
litre
from
east
carlsbad
west.
L
The
lands
highlighted
in
that
pink
color
as
we
understand
it
and
based
on
recent.
You
know,
information
from
the
registry
office
are
the
lands
owned
by
the
algonquins
of
ontario.
L
Yes,
that's
a
good
segue
to
the
second
map,
so
the
the
black
hatching
you
see,
which
is
primarily
lands
further
to
the
east,
are
lands
that
are
are
part
of
the
natural
heritage
system,
as
as
shown
on
the
draft
official
plan
schedule,
so
those
would
be
heavily
constrained
in
terms
of
environmental
features,
unevaluated
wetlands,
water
courses
and
so
on.
O
Okay,
so
that's
more
than
half
well
more
than
half
and
who
owns
the
rest
of
the
lands.
L
Madame
trailer
would
be
dozens,
if
not
hundreds
of
owners
in
the
area.
We
don't
have
a
a
okay.
A
Thank
you
thanks.
Very
much.
Next
up
is
counselor
menard,
followed
by
counselor
leeper
and
counselor
dudas
councilmanard.
M
Thank
you
very
much
chair.
It's
kind
of
segues
from
councillor
mckinney's
questions
more
about
the
the
ownership
of
of
the
lands
on
our
registry.
We
we
know
who
owns
the
the
roughly
100
1000
hectares
of
lands
being
proposed
for
expansion.
Is
that
is
that
correct.
L
M
You
know,
environmental
or
otherwise,
about
the
speculation
that
seems
to
be
occurring
in
ottawa?.
H
Sheriff
I
may
on
this,
I
don't
think
the
planning
act
gives
staff
the
ability
to
to
make
use
that
as
part
of
our
considerations
in
the
process.
Let
you
know
lands
are
owned
by.
We
cannot
make
a
planning
decision
based
on
who
owns
it.
I
do
not
believe
that
that
is
possible
under
the
planning
act
and
under
legal
systems
that
are
allowed.
You
have
to
make
it
on
the
basis
of
the
planning
principles
of
the
proposed
use.
So
I
don't
think
I
don't
you
know
with
respect.
M
No,
and
with
respect
I'm
not
I'm
not
asking
that
we
do
it's
more
so
asking
if
you
have
any
concerns
about
land
speculation
that
may
be
occurring
in
ottawa,.
H
Chair,
I
think
it's
true
to
say
in
any
major
city
in
any
continent,
if
people
sense
that
there
is
an
opportunity
to
expand
the
city,
that
type
of
speculation
will
be
occurring.
If
you
talk
to
farmers
who
farm
on
the
edges
of
the
city
or
people
rural
landowners,
they
will
tell
you
they
get
talked
to
all
the
time.
H
It's
it's
not
something.
We
have
the
powers
under
any
bit
of
provincial
legislation
to
control.
It's
not
something
the
province
has
ever
given
the
municipality,
any
power
is
over
and
it
actually
goes
back
to
civil
law
as
well,
which
is
even
beyond
the
legislative
power.
M
Okay,
moving
on
to
to
some
of
the
gating
policies-
and
I
just
want
to
get
clarity
on
on
where
we're
at
with
the
motions
particularly
point
five
in
the
recommendations
in
the
document.
M
Madam
chair,
so
on
page
1664
of
the
report,
it
says,
if
necessary,
staff
will
also
prepare
gating
policies
for
various
expansion
clusters,
with
the
intent
that
the
conditions
and
the
gating
policies
must
be
resolved
prior
to
the
the
next
op
review,
and
then
staff
note
that
the
three
potential
new
communities
under
consideration
in
category
three
in
appendix
c
are:
are,
you
know
located
outside
the
the
limits
of
the
natural
area,
protections
and
the
site
alteration
bylaw
schedule
could
be
amended
again
following
ministerial
approval
of
the
new
op
council's
discretion.
M
I
just
on
on
recommendation
five.
If
you
can
just
clarify
for
myself,
which
ones
are,
we
saying
will
have
a
gating
policy,
a
gating
criteria
and
which
ones
do
not
at
this
point.
Are
there
any?
Is
there
any
action
that
committee
or
council
needs
to
take
to
ensure
that
that
gating
is
is
appropriately
done
or
are
we
are
covered
by
the
current
recommendations
in
the
in
the
motion.
L
Mr
chair,
yes,
all
the
recommendations,
whether
it
be
for
category
one
or
if
council
draws
from
category
two
or
three
in
staff's
opinion,
require
gating
or
preconditions
before
development.
M
Okay
and
under
number
five
within
the
the
recommendations,
the
draft
recommendations
to
committee,
it
seems
that
the
distributed
option
has
necessary
a
recommendation
for
necessary
gating
policies
for
mobility
and
infrastructure,
and
then
we've
got
the
ore
number
two
and
I
don't
see
gating
there
in
terms
of
the
analysis
of
the
category
three
lands
and
then
number
three
or
number
three,
I
don't.
I
don't
think
I
see
gating
there
either.
M
I
just
just
to
see
clarity
are
we
are
you
looking
for
gating
paul
I've
seen
drafted
gating
policies
throughout
the
documents
the
drafts
are.
There
are
all
of
those
gating
policies
going
to
be
included
with
whatever
option
we
go
forward
with
or
or
not
or
do
do
we
need
to
take
more
action
to
ensure
that
they
are
the
giraffe
gating
policies
you've
put
together.
H
So
chairs
we
have
a
delicate
balance
of
maintaining
available
supply
for
15
years
for
development
under
the
provincial
policies
and
gating
policies.
So
I
you
know
one
might
readily
believe
that
that's
parcels
that
scored
in
the
top
category,
which
are
already
within
our
transit
sheds,
if
you
could
call
it-
are
areas
that
probably
require
no
gating
policies
because
they
are
approximate
to
existing
infrastructure
within
the
transit
area.
H
As
you
go
down,
the
list
we'll
need
progressively
more
gating
policies
to
understand
that
and
a
lot
of
those
gating
policies
will
come
from
the
craft
official
plan
and
also
what
will
come
out
of
the
transportation
path.
H
So
you
know
we'll
ultimately
can
take
council's
direction
on
any
gating
topics.
You
wish
us
to
explore
that's
up
to
council
to
to
advise
us,
but
we
we,
as
staff,
will
link
the
development
to
the
completion
of
those
other
various
master
plans
in
the
gathering
of
additional
information.
H
As
I
said,
you
know
a
lot
of
these
sites
will
we
also
have
the
main
policies
in
the
official
plan
already
which
talks
about
what's
required
for
any
land
to
to
open
for
development?
That
includes
a
plethora
of
technical
studies
that
are
in
the
they're
in
the
the
appendix
to
the
draft
official
plan,
a
very,
very
long
list
of
what's
already
required.
So
a
lot
of
that
information
is
already
a
requirement,
regardless
of
what
additional
gating
policies
we
pick.
So
you
know
again,
we
can
take
further
direction
council,
if
required.
Okay,.
M
I'll
follow
up
with
you
offline
just
to
just
to
make
sure
I'm
clear
on
it.
I
do
see
recommendation
four
has
gating
policies
around
the
category,
one
lands
that
would
be
part
of
the
the
draft
official
plan
for
appendices
and
b.
I
I
see
that
there,
but
you
know
some
other
recommendations
depending
on
the
direction
council
takes.
You
know
taiwan
lands
or
something
else.
I
want
to
make
sure
we've
got
those
appropriate,
gating
policies
set
up
that
have
been
drafted.
M
It
seems
like
in
the
report,
as
part
of
this
so
I'll
follow
up
with
you
offline
to
make
sure
that
we've
got
that
sorted
and
I
get
a
good
understanding
of.
A
Can
I
can
I
just
interrupt
for
a
minute,
because
I
know
we
have
a
revised
taiwan
motion
moved
by
counselor
tierney
and
I
thought
that
it
had
a
gating
component
in
it.
But
when
I'm
reading
that
last
be
it
therefore
resolve.
I
don't
see
something
that
says
that,
but
was
that
addition
not
about
that.
Was
that
not
what
councillor
gower
was
asking
vice
chair
gower
was
asking.
A
K
A
M
H
M
H
A
That
gives
mr
willis
a
chance
to
find
find
that.
M
That
makes
sense
chair
I'll.
Just
ask
a
final
couple
of
questions
here.
Then
we
had
a
delegation
back
in
may
mr
davidson,
who
was
advocating
adding
land
that
I
believe
he
owned
into
the
urban
boundary
area.
There
was
a
subsequent
change
to
our
scoring
criteria
by
council
hubley
at
the
time
around
our
transit
lines,
and
so
I'm
just
wondering
were
the
were
the
davidson
lands
that
he
was
advocating
on
advocated
in
past
one
or
two
or
added
in
past
one
or
two
or
not.
L
Yes,
madam
and
mr
chair,
those
lands
did
fall
within
category
one
past
one
lands.
Yes,.
M
Okay,
thank
you
thank
you
for
that,
and
then
I
just
need
an
explanation
from
staff.
If
that's
okay,
just
to
explain
what
this
means
in
the
report
on
page
65,
it
says
a
legal
test
has
been
adopted
by
the
courts
for
a
public
meeting
that
members
of
council
must
be
capable
of
being
persuaded
by
submissions.
M
I
Chairs,
as
I
mentioned
earlier
today,
well
I'll
go
the
standard
procedure.
The
standard
procedure
of
counsel
is
that,
where
council
has
made
a
decision
on
a
matter
that
subject
to
reconsideration
having
been
utilized,
that
matter
cannot
be
revisited
unless
there
is
the
affirmative
vote
of
three
quarters
of
the
members
of
council
president
voting-
and
there
are
a
couple
exceptions
to
that,
but
I
won't
go
into
here
here.
I
In
this
case,
there
is
required
by
the
planning
act,
a
statutory
public
meeting
that
will
occur
in
the
second
quarter
of
this
year
and
then
there'll
be
a
council
meeting
after
that
and
the
test
of
the
courts
apply
to.
I
That
is
that
the
members
of
the
joint
committee
and
thereafter
the
members
of
council
must
be
capable
of
being
persuaded
by
either
the
written
or
the
oral
submissions
that
are
made
to
the
joint
committee
meeting
and
therefore
it
is
my
opinion
that
it
would
be
inappropriate
to
impose
upon
such
a
meeting
the
the
procedural
requirements
that
council
has
for
revisiting
an
issue.
I
Therefore,
the
when
matters
come
before
the
joint
meeting
and
thereafter
council
the
standard
voting
requirements,
I.e
majority
in
my
opinion,
apply.
M
C
Okay,
I
like
clarification
on
councillor,
menard's
comments,
suggesting
that
my
motion
to
do
with
transit
lands
had
something
to
do
to
benefit
an
individual.
C
I
think
that
would
be
very
inappropriate
behavior
that
I
would
certainly
not
participate
in
and
I'd
like
council
monarch,
to
clarify
why
he
put
his
question
that
way
and
what
was
his
intent
or
suggestion.
M
I
can
clarify
I'm
not
in
insinuating
that
they
were
they're
related
based
on
where
the
lands
were.
That's
all
I'm
saying.
A
A
Okay,
so
before
I
go,
thank
you
councillor
hubley
before
I
go
to
counselor
leeper
and
then
counselor,
dude
us
and
then
counselor
hubley,
counselor
hubley.
Are
you
back
on
the
list?
A
A
Okay,
perfect,
I
just
had
a
question
about
gating
as
it
and
you
know
it's
come
up
probably
more
times
than
any
other
topic
has
today
and
I'm
just
wondering
with
the
tmp
not
begun,
not
completed,
not
even
in
the
works.
A
Is
it
not
very
difficult
for
you
to
do
go
through
this
process
and
at
the
same
time,
how
do
we
make
sure
that
there's
not
cue,
jumping
involved
so
that
somebody
says
well,
you
know
we're
counting
on
that
for
the
15-year
inventory
we're
gonna
have
to
have
boris
okay
done
before
we
go
to
brian
coburn
or
or
take
your
pick,
I
mean
there's
lots
of
airport
parkway.
Any
of
that.
How
do
we
make
sure
that
that's
not
an
argument?
A
That's
made
since
we're
now
looking
at
gating,
I
mean
we
could
have
gating
on
any
place.
A
Definitely
one
of
the
reasons
that
counselor
alcian
terry
supported
by
councillor
suds,
I
mean
chair,
alcinteri,
has
put
forward
the
motion
he
has
is
because
you're
not
doing
a
gating
review,
I
think
on
on
the
south
march,
but
you
darn
well,
should
so
I
mean
across
the
city.
How
do
we
make
sure
that
that
process
of
gating
review
doesn't
interfere
with
tmp,
which
is
only
going
to
start
under
counselor
chair
tierney's
leadership
in
a
in
a
in
a
couple
of
weeks
or
something.
H
25-Year
plan
this
is
lands
to
come
in
and
they're,
not
all
coming
in
day,
one
as
I
explained
earlier,
we
have
lands
that
were
added
in
the
previous
urban
expansions
that
have
not
yet
been
opened
up
and
been
built
on,
there's
still
a
process.
So
there
is
a
a
logical
flow
of
points.
H
Opening
over
time
and
council
already
often
controls
the
levers
of
which
determining
which
comes
in
at
what
time,
through
the
approval
of
secondary
plans
through
the
approval
of
front-ending
agreements
through
the
approval
of
the
development
charges
by
law,
and,
ultimately,
council
has
a
great
deal
of
discretion
to
to
meter
out
what
happens,
provided
that
we
continue
to
provide
the
15-year
land
supplies
required
in
the
shorter
time
frame
of
immediately
draft
approved
elements.
It's
also
part
of
the
pps
that
we
haven't
talked
about
today,
but
the
three-year
range.
H
So
these
decisions
are
not
things
that
are
just
going
to
roll
out
overnight.
We're
not
going
to
have
people
who
are
moving
in
these
new
areas
rolling
over
and
expecting
a
draft
approval
of
a
subdivision.
Next
year.
We
will
have
lots
of
work
to
do.
We
have
secondary
plans
that
would
need
to
be
created
and,
as
I
said,
it
would
roll
into
the
development
charges
and
the
team
and
the
like,
and
the
tmp
does
have
a
prioritization
built
into
it
and
and
the
current
tmp
stands
until
it's
replaced.
A
A
P
Oh,
I
was
just
gonna
say
I
agreed
with
what
steve
had
said.
Sorry.
A
There
you
go
all
right.
Thank
you
for
answering
that
question.
Counselor
leeper,
followed
by
councillor
judas
and
that's
all
the
hands
I
see
now
and
if
there
aren't
any
other
ones
on
general
questions,
we
are
going
to
go
into
the
the
motion.
Section
segment,
council,
leaper.
J
J
So
the
report
I
just
want
to
understand
that
richcraft
has
brought
suit
against
our
decision
to
exclude
the
agricultural
lands
in
our
consideration,
just
wondering
from
legal.
When
do
we
expect
that
to
be
decided
or
settled.
I
Chairs
the
application
has
been
filed
with
court.
None
of
the
background
documentation
has
been
filed
by
the
applicants,
as
as
I
expressed
in
the
legal
comment,
it
is
my
opinion
that
this
is
that
this
application
is
significantly
premature.
I
I
have
some
difficulty
understanding
why
such
an
application
was
filed
before
the
minister
makes
a
decision,
and
that's
a
year
from
now.
So
I
I
can't
imagine
this
application
being
heard
anytime
soon,
chairs.
J
I
I
J
Just
to
staff
one
of
the
things
that
I'll
be
looking
for
as
we
discuss
the
riverside
south
application
is:
is
it
possible
to
get
some
visuals
on
screen
to
take
a
look
at
which
pieces
of
land
might
replace
which,
when
we
get
to
that
portion,
and
then
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
the
process
moving
forward
for
the
taywin
lands,
if
we
were
to
vote
first
in
favor
of
the
inclusion
of
the
taewin
lands
as
a
new
community
focus
in
order
to
make
up
the
additional
270
net
hectares,
what
are
the
decision,
points
and
studies
along
the
way?
J
H
So
chairs,
just
to
go
back.
Is
staff
have
asked
council
for
direction
on
the
remaining
270
and
we
provided
you
options
on
on
on
which
to
do
and
we
will
we
will
work
with
whichever
option
so
this
answer
applies
to
whichever
option
it
is.
If,
if
it
happens
to
be
the
day
when
lands,
we
would
be
requiring
the
proponents
or
the
you
know.
I
think
in
this
case
it's
fair
to
say
our
partners
in
algonquins
of
ontario
to
give
us
additional
information
on
the
natural
heritage
features
in
the
area.
H
More
precise
information
we
have,
we
have
general
information,
we
would
like
more
precise
information.
We
we
understand,
there's
more
geotechnical
information
available
we'd
like
to
see
that
we'd
like
to
see
their
projections
of
the
cost
estimates
for
providing
servicing
we'd
like
to
understand
where
they
think
the
pipes
are
connecting
to
the
lengths
of
pipes,
cost
estimates
for
those
pipes,
there's
a
great
deal
of
technical
information.
But
again
that
would
be
the
very
similar
information
we
require
in
the
opening
of
a
new
secondary
plan,
whether
it
be
fern,
bank
or
other
areas.
H
It's
just
that
we're
being
a
new
community.
It
is
a
little
bit
different
than
kind
of
bolting
on
something
inside
of
an
existing
developed
area.
It
does
make
it
a
little
bit
more
complicated,
so
there's
a
whole
list
of
technical
studies
in
the
draft
official
plan.
We
bring
forward
in
june
it'll
list
those
studies
that
are
required
so
that
it's
very
clear
when
council
adopts
what
information
we
need.
H
So
there
are
lands
that
you
know
that
that
don't
get
approved
in
a
timely
way,
because
there
are
technical
issues
outstanding
in
those
lands,
remain
in
the
inventory
for
several
years.
Until
those
technical
issues
are
resolved,
council
lands,
don't
don't
need
to
be
approved
prematurely.
H
If
there
are
massive
technical
issues
sitting
out
there,
we
will
prioritize
the
lands
within
the
inventory
that
that
are
the
least
technical
issues
to
get
them
online
early.
But
it
is
a
delicate
balancing
act.
We
always
have
to
meet
the
15-year
test.
J
H
Chairs,
you
know,
council
at
any
time,
kendra
can
can
choose
to
change
an
official
plan
designation,
but
ultimately
you
understand
that
that
there's
consequences
to
revoking
and
approval.
We
had
examples
brought
to
us
on
the
table
of
historic
plans
of
subdivision
that
have
been
draft
approved
that
still
stand
today
and
have
not
been
advanced
to
development
state
and
our
ability
to
revoke
those
is
very
limited.
So
council
is
making
a
decision.
H
If
council
makes
the
decision
to
add
these
plans,
then
that
is
what
we
are
focusing
in
on
and
we'll
constantly
need
to
review
the
status
of
that
meet
our
our
land
requirements
from
the
pps.
J
And
that
study
is
going
to
happen
over
so
our
our
initial
request
of
them
to
offer
us
documents,
that's
going
to
be
over
the
next
five
years
or
so,
and
then
we're
going
to
hit
2026
and
we're
going
to
have
to
be
able
to
ensure
a
land
supply.
Is
that
because
it
is
already
in
the
urban
boundary,
it
doesn't
sound
like
that.
Would
force
us
to
try
to
find
more
that
we
won't
have
decided
by
then
that
it's
undevelopable.
J
Okay,
no
that's
helpful.
Thank
you
and
then
I
look
forward
to
the
discussion
of
the
motion.
A
In
so
no
one
else
has
any
general
emotions,
then
okay,
we're
going
to
go
back
to
introduce
the
emotions
and
have
and
I'm
not
to
read
it
again,
because
we've
already
done
that,
but
just
to
say
I'll,
go
and
I'll
say,
for
example,
counselor
hubley
and
I
think
yeah
you're
back
counselor
hubley
give
us
a
genesis
for
your
motion
on
2026
new
official
plan
review.
A
Okay,
so
that
and
that's
why
we'll
proceed
and
then
and
then
we
will
go
with
then
we'll
have
a
discussion
about
that.
If
anybody
has
any
questions,
does
everybody
have
any
copies
of
the
motions
that
you
want
and
does
anyone
at
all
have
any
other
motion
or
direction
that
they'd
like
to
provide
to
melody
at
this
time.
A
I
A
I
A
Right,
so
the
technical
amendment
is
being
moved
by
chair
el
shantiri,
so
I
don't
know
that
you
really
need
to
speak
to
it.
It's
a
technical
amendment.
Does
anyone
want
to
raise
a
hand
to
speak
about
the
technical
amendments.
I
A
No,
so
is
that
item
carried
carried?
Thank
you,
everyone.
The
next
one
is
council
hubley's,
one
on
industrial
lands.
Would
you
like
to
speak
to
that
counselor
hubley.
C
Sure,
madam
chair,
I've
been
discussing
this
one
with
councillor
moffa
as
well.
What
it
is
is
a
piece
of
land
right
at
the
416,
where
the
bar
haven
and
canada
storage
units
are
that
under
review
and
additional
studies,
the
lear
score
has
changed
on
that
land
at
least
some
of
it
and
as
councilor
moffat
said,
there's
one
more
report,
that's
due
in
in
certainly
in
the
weeks
ahead
on
it.
C
So
if
that
changes
the
overall
lear
score,
what
this
does
this
motion
protects
that
that
land
can
come
in
under
this
review,
and
that's
why
the
wording
on
the
bottom,
as
suggested
by
staff,
is
that
staff
will
come
back
to
council
by
june
on
whether
or
not
this
piece
should
come
in
and
if
possible.
G
Yeah
thanks
for
that
there
was
a
there
was
a
motion
that
was
certainly
that
that
had
the
wrong
wording
and
that's
one
that
I
was
concerned
about
cancer
people's
motion
here
does
speak
to
that.
So
it
gives
chance
to
staff
to
do
that
review.
Otherwise
I
would
have
referred
the
other
one
to
june
anyways,
so
it
gives
a
chance
to
have
that
review.
G
It's
no
different
really
than
what
we're
doing
as
a
part
of
lear
and
some
of
the
follow-ups
to
leer
in
the
munster
area,
to
some
of
the
lands
there
and
and
offering
property
owners
the
ability
to
go
out
and
get
their
own
assessments
of
the
soils
specific
to
to
the
the
quality
of
those
parcels.
So
it's
I'm
interested
in
seeing
that
report
because
again
the
only
the
only
data
I
have
on
it
right
now
says
that
it
is.
G
A
C
Yeah
just
to
to
be
crystal
clear
on
this:
we're
not
changing
the
staff
process,
we're
we're
just
trying
to
give
staff
a
little
more
time
to
complete
what
they're
doing
on
these
files
and
to
recognize
that
applicants
have
put
a
lot
of
effort
into
working
with
staff,
so
to
give
them
a
little
more
leeway.
That's
all
it
is.
J
H
The
chairs
we
we
identified
a
range
of
lands
in
the
report
last
year
to
come
in,
and
it's
about
securing
lands,
the
400
series
highways
and
the
interchanges
for
this
industrial
freight
and
storage
use,
so
it
doesn't
get
used
for
other
purposes.
The
limitation
is
the
agricultural
lands
and
we
did
not
score
this
or
identify
this
because
of
the
limitation,
the
agricultural
lands.
J
Thanks,
then,
would
that
come
back
to
council
if,
if
you
determined
that
you
did
want
to
that's
correct
okay,
thank
you
thanks
sure.
L
A
C
I
it
it's
similar
to
the
other
one
but
broader
in
that.
What
I
want
to
do
is
protect
the
work
that
staff
has
undertaken,
where
they
haven't
made
final
decisions
on
properties
that
we
are
reviewing
and
again
it
gives
the
applicants
an
opportunity
to
finish
that
process
and
provide
any
additional
info
they
have
on
it
and
what
it
says
is
that
maybe
we're
not
bringing
in
these
lands
during
this
particular
process,
but
we
will
have
them,
scored
and
ready
to
come
in
at
a
later
date,
if
needed.
A
Thank
you
and
earlier
councillor
menard
was
talking
about.
How
will
we
know
if
intensification
is
actually
happening
at
a
higher
pace,
and
when
do
we
need
less
lands
to
come
in?
We.
This
also
gives
us
the
opportunity,
on
an
annual
basis,
to
look
at
whether
or
not
the
intensification
is
not
meeting
the
objectives
or
the
targets
as
well,
so
that
we
can
adjust
accordingly,
whether
it's
density
in
certain
communities
or
or
whatever
we
don't
know
it's
an
either
or
kind
of
a
thing.
Counselor
leapfrog
has
a
question,
is
any.
J
Yeah
is
any
of
it
work
that
is
not
otherwise
foreseen
to
be
done.
J
H
Chair
the
council
is
correct
that
we
do
monitor
for
many
of
these
items
and
do
report
on
these.
I
think
there's
more
specificity,
and
you
know
I
think
staff
are
understanding,
counselor,
hillbilly's
intent
of
us
to
look
at
some
specific
things
he's
identified,
for
example,
the
the
very
bizarre
times
we're
in
with
the
pandemic
and
the
post-pandemic
effect,
and
whether
this
is
a
short-term
trend
or
a
long-term
trend.
So
there
are
certain
matters
in
the
motion
that
go
beyond
what
we
would
that
that
it's
not
in
the
in
in
what
we've
traditionally
looked
at.
L
I
was
just
going
to
ask
mr
willis
if
he
he
has
the
staff
capacity
to
do
this
type
of
annual
analysis.
I
mean
it's
I
like
what's
being
asked
for,
I
think
it's
important
data
to
to
follow,
but
you
do
have
the
staff
capacity
to
do
what's.
H
Being
asked
so
chairs,
we
already
produce
annual
reports,
mr
food.
This
team
does
a
great
job,
they're,
actually
really
excellent
reports,
I
think,
put
them
on
par
with
any
other
municipality
in
ontario,
and
there
are
some
additional
considerations
in
this
and
we're
going
to
look
clear
carefully
at
this,
and
we
may
bring
in
some
outside
specialized
consulting
expertise
to
support
some
of
these
market
trends.
H
A
All
right
thanks
very
much.
I
don't
see
any
other
hands
waiting
so
on
the
hubley
motion
on
2026
new
official
plan
review
considerations
that
items
carried.
G
A
You
thank
you,
everybody.
Okay.
The
next
motion
up
is
moved
by
counselor
meehan
hi,
caroline.
If
you'd
like
to
speak
to
why
you're
doing
this
on
the
riverside
south
swap.
F
Thanks:
jen
yeah.
I
would
like
to
talk
about
this
and
you
know
three
years
ago,
if
you
told
me
that
I
was
going
to
when
I
was
before
I
was
elected
counselor,
that
I
would
be
before
a
city
committee
right
now
arguing
for
more
development
in
in
riverside
south
and
specifically
on
agricultural
land.
I
would,
I
would
have
laughed
at
you
because
it
just
goes
against
everything
that
I
believe
yet
here.
I
am
introducing
this
motion
to
include
this
parcel
of
land.
Why?
F
Because
it's
both
illogical
to
not
do
that
and
in
the
long
run,
if
we
don't
allow
it
it's
going
to
cost
us
the
city
a
whole
heck
of
a
lot
more
money.
F
Riverside
south
is
growing
one
of
the
fastest
growing
communities
in
the
south
end
next
of
our
haven
and
for
good
reason
in
just
a
little
bit
more
than
a
year
and
you've
all
been
told
that
in
2022
the
trillium
line
will
be
open
in
riverside
south
and
it's
going
to
connect
riverside
south
to
up
to
the
airport
and
and
right
into
the
heart
of
the
city.
F
So
and
the
train
is
going
to
come
right
into
the
heart
of
riverside
south
into
what's
going
to
be
our
new
town
center
riverside
south
is
going
to
reap
the
benefits
of
this
of
being
a
truly
transit
oriented
community
serviced
by
two
lrt
stations.
That's
the
line
bank
station,
the
terminus
and
the
boseville
station,
and
if
you're
out
that
way,
you'll
see
that
they're,
the
construction
is
going
very
very
quickly
on
these
two.
So
it's
gonna
complete
the
picture.
F
A
new
15-minute
community,
except
for
that
one
glaring
hole
that
now
exists
on
the
south
side
of
the
rail
line.
We've
had
to
exclude
attractive
land
that
is
designated
agricultural.
You
know
and
I
voted
to
protect
agricultural
lands
like
you
all.
Did
it's
important
that
I
stand
by
that
principle?
However
it
at
this
point
it
doesn't
really
make
sense
in
riverside
south.
F
If
we
don't
pass
this
motion,
the
only
way
that
people
are
going
to
get
to
the
bowseville
park
and
ride
is,
if
they
take
cars,
there
will
be
no
homes
to
support
what
we've
done
there.
F
This
is
not
an
easy
ask
for
me,
and
I
wouldn't
be
here,
though,
if
it
didn't
make
sense,
the
land
swap
proposed
that
106
hectares,
I
believe,
will
make
this
motion
even
more
reasonable,
hopefully
to
a
lot
of
you
and
the
planning
staff
support
the
swapping
of
the
lands,
because
they
recognize
that
this
will
foster
transit,
oriented
development
and
increase
ridership
at
the
boseville
stations.
F
Expansion
will
remain
north
of
rideau
road,
which
I
think
is
really
important,
because
those
communities
will
be
built
close
to
transit,
and
then
we
will
have
rideau
road,
basically
as
a
buffer
or
a
new
community
urban
like
a
boundary
line
on
the
south
side,
so
it
will
be
clean
and
everybody
will
know
where
development
is
going
to
going
to
stop,
and
I
think
perhaps
probably
the
most
important
part
is
the
development
of
the
proposed
development
of
this
new
gold
belt
at
three
and
a
half
times
larger
than
what
we've
got
in
the
current
green
belt.
F
It'll
ensure
that
there'll
be
no
more
encroachment
into
the
rural
lands.
So
I'm
asking
everybody's
support
today
for
this
motion,
because
I
think
it
makes
total
sense.
We've
already
made
the
investment
and
by
not
supporting
the
development
in
this
parcel
of
land,
we're
not
going
to
maximize
our
develop
our
investment.
So
for
those
reasons,
I'm
asking
you
to
support
this
motion.
Thank
you.
A
Well
said
councilman,
and
we
you
have,
you
have
certainly
caused
some
interest.
We
have
councillor
deruse,
followed
by
councillor
leeper
councilor,
moffatt,
counselor
kits
counselor
deroz.
I
I
That,
while
the
map
is
coming
up,
I
do
support
counselor
me
and
they
make
a
lot
of
sense.
And
if
you
look
at,
I
am
not,
it
is
very
difficult
for
me
as
rural
councillor
to
support
redesignation
from
an
agriculture
land,
but
this
specific
land.
It
makes
sense
because
I
personally,
as
a
rural
councilor,
don't
like
to
see
the
growth
going
past
through
the
road
and
unfortunately,
the
green.
The
land
was
highlighted
in
green,
its
score
and
the
number
as
a
category
two.
I
But
if
you
can
see
it
actually
will
encroach
into
coming
to
greely
and
coming
to
mitch
owns
and
for
us
it
makes
sense
to
actually,
if
you
look
at
west
side
of
boseville
and
why
we're
leaving
all
this
vacant
area
where
the
farming
in
it
anyway,
these
land
they're,
not
really
good
farming
land
and,
secondly,
we're
spending.
Look
at
the
proximity
of
the
lrt
station,
like
counselor
meehan,
was
mentioning.
We
can't
leave
that
loophole
or
a
land
empty
land
in
the
middle.
E
I
Kilometer
away
from
our
rt
station,
that
was
spending
a
lot
of
money
and
then
yet
allowing
encroachment
and
and
growth
happening
to
the
south
of
hyderabad.
So
I
I
do
understand.
If
you
look
at
the
picture,
it's
external
a
lot
and
sometimes
the
picture
is
actually
better
than
thousand
thousand
word.
I
do
support
counselor
meehan
and
I
unfortunately
I
do
agree
with
her
on
on
the
logic
that
why
we
support
why
we
should
read
designated
land,
and
hopefully
the
committee
will
see
that
also.
Thank
you.
A
All
right,
all
right!
So
next
up
we
have
councillor
lieber,
followed
by
councilor
moffat
and
counselor
kitts.
J
Thought
you
want
to
see
it
jeff
yeah.
No.
I
appreciate
that
george.
Thank
you.
So
what
would
the
swap
be?
Are
staff
able
to
sort
of
show
us
which
lands
would.
H
So
chair,
here's-
if
I,
if
I
may,
the
we
haven't,
mapped
it
out
yet,
but
the
idea
was
you
take
the
land
area,
that's
in
green
and
you
fill
in
that
area
of
that
nub
and
go
as
far
south
as
you
can
with
that,
and
we
probably
talked
to
the
landowner
to
figure
out
exactly
the
best
configuration
of
that
tucking
that
in
but
it
it's,
the
intent
is
to
try
to
close
in
the
area.
That's
between
white
and
yellow,
with
the
the
equivalent
amount
of
land.
That's
green.
J
Okay
and
sorry,
so
someone
was
just
using
their
cursor
to
kind
of
show
the
the
rough
area
where
that
would
be.
Could
they
do
that
again?
J
J
There's
two
really
important
public
interests
here:
the
preservation
of
agricultural
land,
which
is
something
that
we
all
agreed,
was
critical,
even
as
we
expand
the
urban
boundary,
and
you
know
the
efficient
use
of
land
and
particularly
transit-
and
you
know
certainly
I
consider
that
sustainable
transit
is
critical
to
the
future
of
the
city,
I'm
just
wondering
if
transit
or
sorry
transportation
staff
could
weigh
in
on
what
the
implications
are
of
going
south
of
rideau
river
road
and
leaving
those
areas
unpopulated.
P
Line
chairs,
I
can
say
that.
P
Of
putting
the
land
closer
to
the
lrt
line
primarily
is
to
promote
walking
and
cycling
to
that
lrt
connection,
it's
also
more
efficient
to
serve
from
from
a
a
feeder
bus
perspective,
but
really
it's
the
because
you're
you
would
be
within
a
walking
and
cycling
distance
as
opposed
to
the
lands
that
are
much
further
to
the
south.
P
City
that
the
walking
and
cycling
mode
share
drops
quite
significantly
the
further
that
you
travel
from
the
station
and
the
scoring
actually
for
the
land
parcels
was
set
up
to
capture
that
effect,
so
that
parcels
within
the
300
to
600
meters
scored
higher
than
parcels
that
were
at
that
1.9
kilometer
radius.
And
that
was
set
up
to
reflect.
That.
J
That
the
green
parcel,
the
past
two
lands
I'm
trying
to
make
sense
of
the
scale.
That's
there.
It
looks
like
those
are
two
kilometers
away
say
to
the
the
corner,
the
the
northern
edge.
P
I
believe
they
were
within
a
2.5
kilometer
travel
distance
by
road
to
the
lrt
station,
and
that
was
why
they
were
included
as
a
path
to
lands.
H
There's
if
I
may
assist
jennifer
that
the
dashed
line
on
the
the
map,
which
is
faint,
shows
the
capture
area
around
the
stations
where
we
believe
the
highest
walking
cycle
would
be,
which
would
be
less
than
two
kilometers.
So
that
should
give
you
the
council's
right.
It's
about
it's
1.9
kilometers
is
the
dashed
line.
J
Okay
yep.
Thank
you.
The
sustainability
of
our
light
rail
and
its
feasibility
has
it
been.
It
has
been
conceived
of
in
the
context
of
those
parcels
remaining
undeveloped,.
G
J
Chair
I'll
leave
it
there,
I'm
curious
to
hear
from
my
colleagues
you
know
this
is
a
couple
of
really
important
public
interests
that
are
at
odds
with
one
another
as
a
result
of
our
decision
to
expand
the.
E
Very
much
councillor
lieber
and
we
go
through
the
list.
I
believe
council
mafia.
What's
next
council
mafia.
G
Thank
you.
So
what
this
motion
does?
What
this
motion
says
is
that
transit
is
more
important
than
agriculture,
transit,
trumps
agriculture.
There's
a
transit
station
close,
so
agriculture
doesn't
matter
anymore.
Transit
is
the
moving
target.
Agriculture
is
not
agriculture
is
there,
agriculture
cannot
be
moved,
transit
can
be
moved,
transit
is
coming
to
stittsville.
G
An
lrt
station
will
be
built
on
robert
grant's,
not
too
far
from
south
of
fernbank.
What
south
of
fernbank
agricultural
lands
primary
cultural
lands?
Agricultural
lands
that
score
exactly
the
same
as
these
lands.
So
let's
not
apply
some
logic
that
this
is
logical
land
to
grow
on,
because
transit
is
close
to
it.
Transit
can
move,
transit
can
be
close
to
other
agricultural
lands.
Transit
in
the
future
can
be
close
to
south
of
hope,
side
road.
G
You
grow
further
south
you
bring
transit
along
with
it.
You
go
stay
with
the
fern
bank.
You
go
down
to
flue
ellen
you
bring
transit
with
it.
Now
you
go
stay
with
the
flu
ellen
down
to
foul
field.
You
bring
transit
with
it
next
thing,
you
know
we're
connecting
richmond
to
transit
and
now
all
north
of
richmond
is
agriculture
land.
G
Because
that's
that's
the
decision
you
make
once
you
decide
that
you
take
lands
that
score
172,
168
161
160
in
the
lear
lands
that
have
not
been
refuted
as
agricultural
lands,
even
though
other
land
owners
owning
similar
lands
have
produced.
Reports
have
taken
the
time
to
produce
soils
reports
to
argue
our
soils
data.
No
one
took
the
time
to
do
that
here.
Why?
G
So
logic
doesn't
belong
here.
If
you
want
to
have
a
logical
boundary,
it's
agricultural
land.
If
you
decide
that
agriculture
land
is
not
a
logical
boundary,
then
the
gold
belt
doesn't
matter.
The
agricultural
resource
area
doesn't
matter
because
you're
choosing
today
that
something
else
is
more
important
than
agriculture
all
the
way
through
the
lear
process-
and
I
shared
that
with
your
written
group.
G
As
you
all
know-
and
I
keep
on
reminding
people
because
I
like
to
do
that
stuff
2012
to
2016.,
we
constantly
keep
on
having
a
discussion
of
what
conflicts
with
agriculture,
nothing
conflicts
with
agriculture.
We
made
our
lear
structure
so
that
agriculture
was
the
prime
use
and
that
everything
else
around
it
is
a
conflict
with
agriculture.
But
agriculture
isn't
a
conflict
with
it,
because
agriculture
is
the
prime
use,
it
has
to
be
the
primary
use.
G
So
I
can't
support
this
there's
a
reason
why
we
had
a
motion
in
front
of
committee
back
in
may.
That
said,
no
agricultural
lands
will
be
will
be
considered.
These
lands
we
knew
about
then,
because
when
we
had
that
motion
on
the
table,
the
owners
of
these
lands
came
to
our
committee
and
said:
don't
do
this
consider
these
lands
the
transit
station,
we
decided
it
was
going
to
go
there.
A
few
years
ago
we
decided
it
was
going
to
go
there
before
may
of
2020..
We
decided
to
protect
these
agricultural
lands
in
may
of
2020..
G
What's
changed
between
may
of
2020,
and
today
the
transit
didn't
change.
The
agricultural
scores
didn't
change,
so
what's
changed
between
may
of
2020,
and
today
I
asked
that
and
every
single
one
you
should
ask
that
same
thing.
When
you
vote
for
this
motion,
you
should
ask
yourself:
can
you
answer
what
has
changed
on
these
lands?
That
would
make
you
vote
differently
today
than
you
voted
in
may
of
2020
to
protect
these
in
the
first
place
and
to
be
clear,
we
all
did.
N
I
probably
am
not
gonna
give
comments
that
are
as
eloquent
as
counselor
moffat
just
did,
but
it
was
really
that
that
was
my
question.
I
wasn't
here
for
the
decision
in
may,
but
the
way
that
I
understand
it
is
that
at
that
time
these
conversations
were
had
if
there
are
lands
that
are
close
to
municipal
services
or
transit.
N
Should
they
be
considered,
and
I
believe
at
that
time
there
was
an
argument
that
that
maybe
they
should
be
considered-
and
maybe
we
shouldn't
put
a
full
stop
on
all
agricultural
land.
So
I
guess
my
question
was
just:
does
this
open
the
door
for
everybody
else
who
feels
like
their
land
would
be
a
good
fit
based
on
the
fact
that
it's
close
to
transit
or
as
close
to
municipal
services,
because
I
think
there
are
other
landowners
in
other
parts
of
the
city
that
feel
like
their
land
should
have
consideration
at
some
point.
A
Mr
willis
can
speak
because
he's
been
asked.
This
question
to
the
number
of
other
opportunities
are
the
same
in
the
city.
H
So
to
chairs
I
respect
the
question
that
counselor
asks
is
a
pivotal
question.
The
council
has
to
decide
today.
I
was
asked
whether
staff
would
support
this
particular
situation
and
the
reason
staff
would
support
this
particular
situation
is
this
is
not
a
planned
transit
network?
It's
an
under
construction,
it's
actually
there,
it's
actually
physically
already
there.
We
would
having
declared
what
council
made
decision
made
in
may
and
with
any
future
ones,
they
will
have
had
plenty
of
notice
that
we
would
never
again
support
another
one.
H
This
would
be
the
last
and
I
think
that's
the
limitations
on
staff's
position
on
this,
because
the
very
counselor
council
leaper
said
it
quite
eloquently.
This
is
a
competition
of
public
interests
council's
going
to
have
to
weigh
which
interests
that
wish
to
add
priority.
To
I
see
if
the
public
interests
get
weighed
up
against
each
other,
as
councilor
moffat
has
been
a
passionate
spokesperson
for
the
agricultural
lands,
and
I
could
never
speak
as
passionately.
H
On
the
other
side,
the
five
big
moves
in
the
15
minute
neighborhoods
and
the
opportunity
to
build
the
first
prototype
of
a
15
minute
neighborhood
on
land
with
a
station
that
will
be
an
open
before
development
ever
comes.
So
that's
the
why
this
is
a
unique
situation.
Staff
would
never
support
in
any
other
location.
A
M
A
Thank
you,
and-
and
I
can
tell
you
that
as
a
person
who
was
a
member
of
the
sponsor
group
on
the
official
plan
and
certainly
councilor
moffat,
councillor
blay
at
the
time,
councilor
al-shantiri,
counselor,
hubli
and
counselor
tierney
and
councillor
gower,
I
think
I
have
that
right.
A
We
were
very,
very
clear
with
staff
on
six
occasions
saying
no
agricultural
land.
This
is
before
council,
had
it
before
you
just
when
we
started
planning
no
agricultural
land.
What
should
have
happened
is
because
it
took
us
six
times
to
get
to
so
that
they
were
actually
listing.
It
was
because
of
this
location.
What
they
should
have
done
is
said
counselors.
You
are
aware
of
this
situation.
P
Yeah
I'm
here,
thank
you.
Maybe
I'm
gonna
ask
a
stupid
question,
but
how
did
we
end
up
with
the
transit
station
if
we
knew
it
was
agricultural
land.
H
Yes,
so
chairs
I'm
going
to
do
my
best,
because
this
these
decisions
were
were
made
before
I
was
here.
I
mean
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
have
it
is
we
had.
We
were
using
an
existing
rail
corridor
for
the
north-south
component
of
the
trillium
line
and
at
some
point
it
had
to
turn
west
towards
riverside
south,
and
this
the
advantage
of
this
site
was
the
city
already
owned.
H
The
land
on
which
the
station
is
to
be
situated
and
didn't
have
to
go
out
and
buy
that
land
which
would
reduce
the
costs.
The
other
element
is,
as
it
ties
in
so
south,
closer
to
the
town
center
as
part
of
the
alignment.
Mr
migolas
may
have
more
to
tell
a
little
about
the
history.
Some
of
this
predates
my
time
with
the
city
yeah,
but
but.
A
Line,
no
it
actually
you
weren't
here
and
nobody.
I
think
on
the
screen
was
here:
maybe
council,
cheryl
chandiri,
but
this
was
part
of
the
north
south,
lrt
okay,
that
was
voted
on
and
passed
by
a
council
in
june
2006
that,
after
the
election
in
december
of
2006
killed
the
north
south
freaking
lrt
okay,
so
I'm
not
in
in
addition
to
losing
like
a
hundred
million
dollars
plus,
we
also
had
already
purchased
land
okay,
and
we
already
knew
that
riverside
south,
which
was
added
in
1979.
A
A
That's
how
far
this
story
goes
back
goes
back
and
you
know
the
first
part
of
the
of
the
o
train
of
the
whole
rapid
transit
in
the
city
went
to
greenbrook
station.
I
don't
think
councillor
deans
is
in
the
room
with
us,
or
she
could
certainly
speak
to
it
as
well,
but
it
does
have
that
kind
of
history.
P
Yeah
but
but
we're
designating
it
as
agricultural
land
now
and.
P
Okay,
we're
saying
that
it's
prime
agricultural
land,
so
I'm
just
puzzled
on
how
that
happened.
So
you
know
not,
you
know,
but
thank
you
for
the
history
and
I'm
sorry
if
I
touched
a
sore
point,
no.
A
No,
it's
not.
I
just
thought
it
was
important
and
also
the
counselor
moffat
could
speak
to
you
about
when
we
finally
had
a
lear
report
and
that
timing
was
very
recent
too.
You
know
us
and
I
would
say
that
there's
some
people
now
that
are
very
sorry
that
they
didn't
challenge
whether
they
were
right
or
not.
A
We
have
some
landowners
that
challenged
the
lear
report
and
were
successful
or
not
successful
and
nobody
challenged
on
this
one
and
and
even
though
they
knew
when
the
lear
was
passed,
that
the
plans
for
the
north,
south,
lrt
and
and
and
continued
to
transit
into
south
ottawa
was
part
of
the
plan.
So
that's
really
sorry
to
interrupt
you.
P
No,
it's
okay.
I
think
it's
actually
part
of
what
we
should
know.
I
think
it's
important
to
have
that
history
and
and
put
it
in
context
of
what's
happened,
I'm
concerned
about
this
because
everyone's
saying
no,
it
won't
set
a
precedence,
but
I'm
very
concerned
about
it
and
in
ottawa
we
have
a
history
of
having
big
chunks
of
land
that
are
not
to
be
developed.
I'm
going
to
give
the
example
of
moody
station,
which
will
be
surrounded
by
green
belt,
and
it
will
not
be
development
there.
P
So
so
it's
not
not
the
first
time.
This
has
happened,
that's
that's
happening
and
and
we're
crossing
our
fingers
that
continues
to
be
that
moody
station
at
the
end
of
the
stage
two
line
will
will
not
have
development
around
it.
P
It
will
not
have
the
intensification
so
unless
somebody's
gonna
say
well,
we'll
just
make
it
another
change,
but
of
course
it's
a
green
belt
and
it's
ncc,
but
so
I
I
do
get
concerned
about
precedence
of
these
things,
and
I
also
wonder
about
why
is
agricultural
land
considered
such
a
bad
thing
in
terms
of
being
near
things?
Why
can't
it
be
embraced
and
integrated?
P
I'm
looking
at?
What's
happened
in
chelsea,
where
they
have
the
hendrick
farm
right
beside
them
and
they
have
market
gardening.
We've
we've
talked
about
the
whole
movement
of
foods,
and
this
isn't.
This
is
to
me
a
possibility
that
we
embrace
it
that
it's
within
the
city
limits
that
we
we
look
at
it
another
way
that
it's
not
just
big.
You
know,
corn
fields,
that
we
can.
We
can
have
it
as
part
of
the
community,
so
I
think
there's
opportunities
as
well.
P
So
I
appreciate
that
you
know
that
agriculture
land
is
important
because
we're
not
going
to
invent
more
of
it,
and
I
I
think
it
is
important
to
to
hold
on
to
thank
you.
E
Thank
you,
council
of
kavanaugh.
I
I
only
see
councillor
meehan's
hand.
You
already
spoke
right,
counselor,
meehan,.
F
Yeah,
thank
you
chair.
No,
I
just
just
a
couple
of
points.
Councillor
moffat
is
right.
This
is
prime
agriculture
land,
although
it
not
all
of
it
scored
170.
As
he
said
some
of
it's
125,
some
of
it's
150.,
so
just
to
clarify
that.
But
the
fact
of
the
matter
is,
I
mean
we,
the
city's
already
made
a
sizable
investment
in
these
two
lrt
stations
and
to
have
the
you
know
to
have
the
residential
component
in
this
parcel
of
land.
F
I
think
it
will
be
go
a
long
way
to
completing
a
loop.
It's
not
just
the
train
going
into
linebacking
station,
the
center
of
riverside
south.
At
that
point,
we're
also
going
to
have
the
brt,
which
is
going
to
link
riverside
south
up
right
up
into
bar
haven
into
the
barf
haven
town
center,
so
the
the
people
who
will
live
in
herbicide
south.
If
we,
if
this
motion
is,
is
accepted
today
or
we
vote
on
it.
The
people
who
will
live
there
can
also
work
in
bar
haven,
which
is
growing
exponentially.
F
You
know
that
seeing
amazon
may
have
more
manufacturing
going
in
there.
These
people
will
support
the
rail
line
and
the
brt
100
million
dollar
investment.
You
know
and
as
a
fiscal
conservative
I
I
don't
want
us
to
be
throwing
money
away.
I
am
also.
I
also
agree
that
you
know
we
have
to
protect
our
ag
land,
but
we're
going
to
swap
we're
going
to.
I
think
the
swamp
will
work
here,
but
it's
written
into
the
motion
that
this
will
not.
F
Hopefully
will
this
will
be
an
exclusive
deal
and
it
only
makes
sense
in
this
area
right
now
because
of
it
it
will
complete
the
whole
transit
oriented
area,
and
if
you
go,
if
you
were
to
go
out
to
these
lands,
what
would
you
see
nothing
much
different
than
than
you
know?
It's
just
land
sitting
there.
One
side
of
boeseville
road
looks
very
much
like
the
side
on
the
other
side
of
bullsville
that
we're
talking
about
that
the
land
is.
F
Is
you
can't
tell
the
difference
of
what
it
is
once
light
side
is
protected
and
the
other
side
isn't
in
a
perfect
world
yeah?
We
we
wouldn't
need
this,
but
I
think
that,
given
the
situation
that
we're
living
in
today
do
we
need
we
need
sustainable
transit
and
I
think
we
need
this
development
right
now,
so
yeah
we
could
put
in
community
gardens
or
something
later
on,
there's
going
to
be
all
kinds
of
space
for
that,
but
this
makes
so
much
sense
on
so
many
different
levels.
F
So
that's
why
we're
arguing
for
it
now,
let's,
let's
do
what
we're
supposed
to
do.
Get
this
rail
line
in
next
year,
like
it's
exciting
we're
gonna,
have
transit
right
across
from
downtown
right
through
riverside
south
over
into
bar
haven.
It's
going
to
be
a
complete
loop
and
it's
you
know
something.
A
lot
of
other
communities
are
envious
of
right
now.
So
let's,
let's
put
the
people
in
there
that
can
support
it.
That's
it.
G
G
G
G
G
150
is
well
above
the
1,
the
125
threshold.
So
let's
not
minimize
the
land
and
pretend
that
it
that
I'm
fudging
numbers
when
it
comes
to
the
scoring
the
scoring
is
all
available.
You
can
visit
the
map
online.
Anyone
can
check
it
if
they'd
like
and
they
can
check
the
scores
they
compare
to
those
scores
around
the
city
as
well.
Thank
you.
E
E
But
in
the
meantime
we
are
protecting
53
000
hectare
in
the
gold,
well
essentially
for
our
future
food
security,
environmental
protection
and
overall
financial
sustainability
for
infrastructure.
But
with
this
particular
motion
I
also
have
to
admit
it.
This
location
makes
sense
for
transit,
oriented
development
and
I
agree.
Yes,
you
can
change
the
station,
but
that
should
be
done
five
years
ago,
not
when
the
train
is
going
to
be
running
next
year.
We
should
have
done
this
five
years
ago.
I
might
include
that
parcel
or
change
the
location
of
the
traffic
five
years
ago,
not
today.
E
Unfortunately,
the
direction
we
had
at
the
time
to
the
staff
did
not
say
that
the
agriculture
land
is
a
sacred.
Do
not
go
nearly
that's
something
I
take
responsibility
in
it
as
well.
I
also
agree
that
one
time
opportunity
that
we
shouldn't
miss
if
we
are
committed
really
to
to
transit,
oriented
community.
E
E
I
think
the
using
of
the
106
hectare
for
transit,
oriented
development
helps
protect
the
remain
of
the
53
000
hectare
and
made
the
most
out
of
our
investment
in
a
light
trail
to
roseville,
which
is
I
voted
for,
and
I
I
don't
want
to
hatch
something
from
the
past,
but
councilor
harder
is
right.
That's
the
language,
that's
it
from
day,
one
from
early
2000
for
the
north
south,
the
lrt
folks.
I
am
voting
for
this
motion
and
let
me
tell
you
I
don't
take
the
pleasure
of
doing
this,
but
my
reconciliation
is.
E
We
are
protecting
53
000
hectares
in
a
gold
belt
by
doing
this
today,
so
I
hope
you
count
on
your
support
to
council
meetha
and,
if
there's
for
some
reason,
there's
another
create
another
way
of
doing
this
between
now
and
council
on
on
february
10th.
Let's
all
work
together
with
our
staff,
but
I
find
it
in
the
last.
I
I
doubt
it
in
the
last
minute
we're
going
to
find
a
solution
to
this.
So
therefore,
I
would
be
supporting
for
the
motion
and
we're
going
to
ask.
A
No
I'm
going
to
just
do
the
I
have
the
list
in
front
of
me:
okay,
counselor
dude.
This
is
on
the
councilor
meehan
motion
on
riverside
south
councilor
dudas.
Yes,
counselor
tyranny.
D
N
G
A
Ten
to
two:
thank
you
very
much
everybody.
Next
up,
we
have
counselor
elton
terry
again
and
this
time
it's
like
a
repeat
performance.
This
is
on
the
march
lands
remove
march
lands,
counselor
alchemy,
terry.
If
you
want
to
tell
us
why
you
have
this
before
us
today,.
E
There
you
go.
Oh
sorry,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
colleagues
for
growing
up
with
us
in
the
last
couple
of
days
we
heard
from
from
our
resident
in
the
area
and
this
area
I'm
familiar
with,
and
some
of
you
are,
we
call
it
area,
one
which
is
canada.
North
expansion,
which
is
council,
turn
it
down
in
the
past.
E
What
was
recommended
for
expansion
that
omb
hearing
inside
the
area,
one
which
is
called
canada
north
today,
is
agree
to
grant
it
it's
been
done
ten
years
ago,
and
today
we
have
not
one
house
built
on
that
period.
E
Still
even
council
at
the
time
10
years
ago,
felt
the
need
to
do
to
keep
the
city
moving
and
didn't
find
martial
is
the
only
artillery
for
that
area.
Basically,
most
of
west
carlton
come
to
martial
early
in
the
morning
and
go
back
on
mod
show
the
evening.
So
that's
basically
meant
our
own
major
connection
between
canada
and
and
south
mart
and
west
culture.
E
Also
in
that
area,
folks,
we
have
five
existing
country,
state
law,
subdivisions
and
we're
recommending
expanding
the
urban
boundary
around
those
five.
Some
today,
in
the
past,
when
they
were
building
on
the
east
side
of
old
carpro,
that
developer
was
forced
by
the
moe
to
buy
a
couple
of
homes
and
provide
water
for
the
corner
enrichment
side.
Road
and
one
of
them
is
the
dentist's
office
and
the
other
building
was
a
plastic
surgeon.
E
And
we
have
it
that
all
all
that
is
reported.
I
I
believe
we
still
have
that
on
the
city.
So
I
can
read
the
motion
again,
whereas
recommendation
three
of
staff
report
identify
a
cluster
of
land
shown
as
south
march
175.35
net
hectare
as
a
potential
area
to
be
identified
for
urban
expansion
depending
on
result
of
further
analysis
and
study
and
where
this
is
a
challenging
area
to
develop
due
to
the
exclusive
reliance
on
marshall,
the
adjacent
country,
residential
subdivision
and
the
proximity
to
the
south
march,
thailand.
E
So
much
so
that
council
has
previously,
as
I
said
earlier,
rejected
expansion
onto
this
area
only
to
have
been
overruled
by
the
ontario
municipal
goal,
whereas
the
land
identified
are
difficult
and
expensive
to
serve
due
to
the
bedrock
condition
and
the
potential
impact
on
the
five
and
chasing
country
residential
subdivision
and
where,
as
further
expansion
in
this
area
towards
robin
and
the
south
march,
thailand
based
speculation,
land
investment
and
further
investment,
which
is
also
contrary
to
the
city,
intend
to
prevent
encroachment
on
villages.
So
basically
the
land.
A
Thank
you
chair
al
shantiri
and
I'd
just
like
to
ask
for
clarification
because
we're
doing
this
in
the
order
that
it
was
advised
by
legal,
but
I
am
asking
again
for
clarification.
A
You
heard
the
emotion
from
chair
al
shantiri.
I
don't
I'm
surprised
that
the
tyranny
motion
doesn't
go
first
because
of
the
way
that
that's
written.
Can
I
ask
for
clarification
please,
before
I
go
to
speakers.
I
Chair
this
motion
that
this
motion
suggests
that
the
lands
be
added
to
recommendation
five.
Then
the
tyranny
motion
motion
by
counselor
tyranny
deals
with
how
recommendation
five
is
to
be
implemented.
Therefore,
it
made
sense
to
me
that
we
should
first
know
how
many
lands
are
subject
to
recommendation
by
before
we
deal
with
make
before
committee
deals
with
the
decision
under
recommendation.
Five.
A
So
if
this,
if,
if
the
alcenteri
motion
passes
on
south
march,
then
there
has
to
be
a
change
in
the
tyranny
motion
on
taewin
to
include
a
different
number.
I
That
is
one
option.
Madam
chair,
it's
joint
committee
could
take
your
view
that
the
270
should
be
dealt
with
one
way
and
the
175
another
way.
That's
that's
a
possible
option
or
a
committee
could
indeed
decide
that
instead
of
the
tiering
motion
reading
270,
it
will
be
4
45.,
but.
A
L
Thanks
chair
just
a
question
for
counselor
l
shantiria,
I
just
want
to
better
understand
if,
if
his
motion
and
counselor
tierney's
emotions
are
married
or
whether,
in
the
absence
of
a
motion
from
counselor
tyranny,
whether
counselor
al-shantery
would
have
proposed
this
motion
anyway.
Is
it
directly
linked
to
counselor
tyranny's
motion?
Or
would
you
have
done
this
anyway,
because
you
saw
the
need
in
your
community.
E
E
L
H
So
chairs
staff
in
the
staff
report
asked
council
for
further
direction
on
the
270.,
so
what
we
would
now
be
asking
for
further
direction
on
445..
So
at
some
point
we
would
hope
that
council
would
give
us
direction
which
of
the
options
we've
put
in
our
report.
You
would
prefer
we
focus
in
on
as
we
complete
the
draft
official
plan.
L
Okay,
thank
you
and
my
final
question
is:
can
you
just
comment
further
remind
us
your
professional
comments
on
the
el
shantiri
motion.
H
So
chairs
stop
stand
by
the
the
report
as
presented.
We
did
identify
these
lands
based
on
the
criteria
we
had
presented.
They
did
score
high.
We
acknowledge
the
concerns
council.
Al
shanteria
raise,
and
those
are
documented
in
the
report
that
you
know
scoring
systems
are
not
perfect.
They
don't
pick
up,
but
necessarily
all
of
these
considerations,
so
we
understand
it.
We
will
follow
council's
will
on
this
issue.
L
Okay,
thank
you.
That's
it
for
me,.
J
Thanks
chair
and
you
know,
my
question
is
for
staff
as
well.
This
is
past
one
land.
Do
staff
agree
that
it
is
just
too
difficult
to
develop
to
include
I'm
paraphrasing
the
paraphrasing
the,
whereas
clauses
of
the
motion,
but
you
know
I'm
trying
to
reconcile
that
motion
with
the
with
the
clear
pass
that
it
got
in
the
in
the
score
in
the
in
scoring.
H
So
chairs
stop
stand
by
that.
What's
in
the
staff
report
that
it
is
possible
to
bring
these
lands
online,
we
acknowledge
that
building
in
and
around
five
different
country
residents,
five
or
six
different
country
residential
state
subdivisions
makes
it
extra
difficult
without
further
study.
I'm
not
sure
how
that
integration
will
work.
So
I'm
not
going
to
dispute
counselor
alchemtery's
point
on
that.
That
is
that
this
is
not
as
easy
as
some
of
their
land,
such
as
we
have
proposals
in
south
bar
haven
and
stittsville.
H
J
The
one
of
the
whereas
clauses
speaks
to
forgive
me,
I'm
just
pointing
up
on
screen
further
expansion
in
this
area
towards
dun
robin
in
the
south
march
highlands
minister
of
speculative
land
investment
for
future
investment.
Is
that
not
a
dynamic
that
comes
about
every
time
we
have
an
expansion.
A
H
The
ontario,
the
former
ontario
municipal
board
and
that,
as
a
general,
a
very
narrow
path
of
general
rural
land
which
reaches
up
towards
the
ottawa
river.
There
is
a
question
about
how,
when
does
it
end,
and
is
it
a?
Is
it
a
logical
area
to
keep
on
going?
So
I
I
I
with
respect.
I
recommend
you
ask
councilman,
also
terry.
If
he
wishes
to
dispute
what
I
said,
he
may
have
his
own
views
of
that.
I'm
just
offering
the
concerns.
As
I
understand
them,.
J
I'll-
and
I
know
council,
charles
ontario
will
wrap
up
and
and
want
to
address
that,
so
I
appreciate
that
answer,
the
the
be
it
resolved
portion
of
this
motion
does
marry
two
different
things.
One
is
to
remove
these
lands
from
the
from
the
immediate
inclusion
into
the
urban
boundary,
and
then
the
second
part
of
it
is
to
include
it
with
the
the
category
three
lands
rig.
J
J
E
N
H
So
chairs,
before
this
land
could
open
up,
we
would
need
to
undertake
a
secondary
planning
process.
We
need
a
master
servicing
study.
We
would
need
again
tying
it.
I
think,
there's
some
significant
issues
with
this
piece
that
the
transportation
master
plan
would
have
to
address,
because
I
think
it's
councilors
from
terry
makes
a
fair
point
about
everything
relying
on
the
march
road
corridor.
H
It's
really
a
single
corridor
that
attaches
to
the
main
spine
system.
So
there
are
a
number
of
issues
this.
This
parcel
of
land
will
require
a
lot
of
planning
before
it
can
come
online,
and
you
might
note
that
land
that's
already
approved
in
this
area
has
not
yet
been
built
on.
So
there
have
been
challenges
in
moving
this
direction,
so
you
I
can
never
give
a
good
projection
on
a
timeline.
I
don't
have
a
great
crystal
ball
on
this.
There
will
land
other.
H
N
I
think
my
question
is
I
I
appreciate
what
you're
saying,
but
if
we
remove
these
south
march
lands,
would
it
increase
the
rapidity
as
of
which
we
would
see
other
challenging
category
one
lands
such
as
orleans
south,
which
rely
on
a
brian
coburn
extension?
That
does
not
exist
at
the
moment
and
it's
not
on
the
affordable
network
and,
as
I
said
so,
would
it
increase
seeing
those
lands
like
the
rapidity
as
by
which
we
would
see
those
lands
be
developed.
H
H
I
think
that
there's
a
middle
category
of
south
march
and
the
cumberland
I
should
cardinal
creek
is
in
the
easiest
lands
as
well.
I
would
say
the
cumberland
and
the
south
march
lands
are
in
the
middle
ground
of
there's
a
lot
of
complicated
work
that
needs
to
get
done.
We
need
the
tmp,
we
need
other
things
to
understand
how
this
would
work
and
they
I'd
put
them
in
the
same
space
and
I
and
that
and
the
taywin
lands
depending
on
how
quickly
we
get
the
information.
Would
you
know.
H
I
mean
ultimately,
as
I
said
this,
we
don't.
The
city
doesn't
control
the
exact
dynamics
of
what
happens
the
fastest.
If
we
have
a
very,
very
motivated
proponent,
who
puts
their,
you
know
shoulder
down
to
the
grindstone
and
gets
us
everything
we
need
and
gets
a
planning
process
happening.
Things
could
happen
more
rapidly.
N
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Just
one
question
for
mr
willis
on
this:
the
go
forward
on
this
lan.
Should
we
like
how
married
are
we
to
this,
as
the
block
that
we
see
before
us?
C
Is
there
an
opportunity
to
change
the
shape
of
that,
for
example,
there's
lands
that
are
close
to
the
boundary
in
here
that
are
probably
easier
to
deal
with
than
the
whole
package.
Like
counselor
alistar
interiors
made
a
very
good
case
as
to
why
he
wants
to
hold
on
the
whole
package.
I'm
just
wondering
thinking
openly
here.
H
H
That's
before
the
council
is
able
to
make
so
you
you
know
my
my
mr
mark
can
correct
me,
but
I
believe
you
have
the
choice
of
taking
counselor
el
shantery's
motion
as
presented,
which
removes
it
all
or
someone
could
propose
an
alternative
motion
that
would
remove
less
of
it
or
you
could
adopt
the
staff's
report,
which
would
include
it
all
as
as
originally
shown.
I
think
those
are
your
three
options.
Mr
mark
can
correct
me
if
there,
if
I
have
not
framed
that
properly.
C
Okay,
thank
you
that
thank
you,
mr
wells,.
E
So
if
there
is
no
one
other
speaker,
I
just
want
to
wrap
it
up
quickly.
I
I
do
appreciate
the
time
we've
given
to
this.
That
folks,
you
heard
from
mr
willis.
This
other
area
would
be
a
lot
easier
to
develop
than
developing
around
five
or
six
existing
country
state
plots
of
division
and
they
made
up.
There's
150
home
and
a
total
of
105
hectare
has
been
designated
for
those
countries
and
comes
to
the
library
to
answer
the
question
once
once
we
go,
you
open
that
up.
E
E
So
there's
nothing
to
protect
that
land
once
once
you
go
that
far
and
and
what's
what's
that
to
the
villages,
what's
going
to
happen
to
the
village
of
don
drapen
and
that's
the
concern
we
have
but
there's
other
land,
you
know
it's,
it's
a
lot
easier
to
develop
than
this
land
and
I
have
to
tell
you
the
cost
of
service
in
that
area,
and
I
know
this
score
high.
E
I
understand
why,
because
mark
showed
the
transit
and
also
employment
area
in
canada
north,
but
it
doesn't
to
that
day
after
10
years,
omb
area,
one
to
the
big
developer
in
the
city
they
have.
We
have
not
seen
one
house
built
there
yet
and
they're
supposed
to
be
3
400
home
and
five
commercial
mall
in
the
area.
One
I
spoke
with
my
colleague
counselor.
Suddenly
I
see
her
on
my
caller.
I
don't
want
to
post
she's,
also
support
every
move
in
that
land
at
this
time.
E
So
what
with
that
I'm
looking
for
your
support-
and
I
hope
I
can
get
your
support
to
this
land
and
again
to
be
that
joint
plan
agriculture.
The
first
committee
recommend
that
council
approve
that
the
south
marchland
cluster
identifier
and
recommendation
will
be
removed
and
the
land
supply
175.35
net
hectare
be
added
to
the
new
community
option
in
recommendation.
5
of
the
staff
support,
as
amended.
D
L
D
C
K
K
A
That
is
eight
to
three
laps
and
okay.
Thank
you.
The
the
last
motion
that
we
have
today
and
I'm
making
another
call
just
in
case
anyone
has
a
motion
that
they
haven't
provided
yet.
A
One:
yes,
okay,
all
right,
so
this
is
being
moved
by
councillor
tierney.
These
are
the
taiwan
lands
of
the
new
official
plan
growth
management
report,
two
lands
proposed
for
residential
and
industrial
urban
expansion.
As
I
said,
taiwan,
lands
and
counselor
tierney.
If
you
just
have
any
comments.
First,
before
I
go
to
counselor
dude.
D
No,
madam
chair,
I
will
save
my
comments
for
wrap
up.
B
Wonderful,
I
just
had
a
question
about
the
the
last
further
be
it
resolved,
and
this
is
the
staff
just
in
regards
to
so
some
of
the
concerns
that
have
been
asked
about
the
cost
of
servicing
this
land
and
the
cost
to
the
municipality.
B
In
the
motion
itself,
it
speaks
to
the
potential
for
accessing
funding,
potentially
through
the
provincial
or
federal
governments,
and
I
was
curious
as
to
what
that
would
mean.
If
staff
could
elaborate
what
potential
funding
opportunities
we
would
have
if
this
land
was
approved.
H
So
jerry
chairs-
I
hope
you
can
hear
me
clearly
I'm
having
some
technical
issues.
The
the
intent
of
the
motion
is
recognizing
that
we
are
talking
about
a
partnership
with
an
indigenous
community
who
is
not
traditionally
a
developer
and
would
not
necessarily
have
the
same
asset
base
that
a
developer
would
have
that.
We
think
is
reasonable
to
go
to
the
senior
levels
of
government
to
ask
them
to
support
the
indigenous
community
with
their
effort
to
develop
these
lands.
Otherwise
those
costs
are
on
them
that
then
get
transferred
on
to
respect
the
future
homeowners.
H
So
I
think
the
the
intention
here
is
a
recognition
that
there
are
big
infrastructure
costs
to
open
these
lands
up
and
that
we
should
at
least
put
the
question
out
there
about
whether
the
senior
levels
of
government
are
prepared
to
support
the
project.
The
city
would
not
want.
Cities
asks
for
its
own
priorities
to
change
that.
We
we
would
see
this
as
the
the
government
supporting
the
algonquins
of
ontario,
not
supporting
the
city
of
ottawa,.
B
And
this
this
land
is
adjacent
to
the
the
amazon
where
fulfillment
distribution
center,
whatever
we
call
it
the
amazon
facility,
it's
right.
Next
to
all
of
that
potential
opportunity.
I'm
trying
I
mean
this
land
in
particular.
I
know
that
we
were.
We
had
difficulties,
I've
had
difficulties
with
assessing
it
and
that
it
is
a
bit
of
a
leap
of
faith
in
some
respects,
but
I'm
also
recognizing
that
there
is
potential
opportunity.
Quite
a
lot
of
potential
opportunity
here,
with
the
being
adjacent
to
to
amazon.
B
Can
staff
speak
a
little
bit
about
how
those
that
potentially
connect
to
the
development
of
this
land,
not
necessarily
what
what
the
algonquin
peoples
are
proposing,
but
I'm
just
saying
from
a
from
a
city
perspective
how
we
could
link
the
two.
A
H
So
chairs
I'll
ask
rice
to
give
the
numbers.
In
a
moment
I
mean,
I
think,
the
the
algonquins
ontario
and
their
partners
control
a
very
vast
area.
We
have
to
understand
more
about
their
phasing
plan,
to
to
understand
kind
of
what
would
go
link.
They
wouldn't
be
physically
connected,
necessarily
because
there
are
intervening
natural
heritage
features
between
the
amazon
site
and
this,
but
you
know
if
we
are
looking
at
economic
synergies,
wouldn't
others.
I
I
think
time
will
tell
I
can't
give.
I
can't
give
the
counselor
a
prediction
on
that.
B
B
I
think,
as
I
said,
this
is
a
bit
of
a
leap
of
faith,
but
in
terms
of
once
again
waiting
in
reconciliation
and
I'm
looking
at
the
opportunity
that
this
could
provide.
I
I'm
very
much
in
favor
of
considering
it,
and
I
I
think
that
this
is
a
good
motion,
so
I
will
be
supporting
this
motion
and
thank
you
steve
for
your
input
on
this.
A
C
C
H
H
There's
a
genesis
for
advice
in
this
motion
about
things
we
should
focus
in
on
and
staff
are
listening
to
the
comments
being
made
by
counselors
in
this
debate,
and
I
think,
ultimately,
the
draft
policies
that
it
should
council
adopt
this.
The
draft
policies
that
accompany
this
decision
in
the
official
plan
we'll
have
to
lay
out
more
detail,
and
I
I
think
staff
will
need
to
do
more
work
on
this.
H
We
couldn't
go
into
this
presuming
council
would
make
this
decision,
but
we
have,
I
think,
as
I
said,
the
genesis
of
some
of
the
the
issues
identified
in
the
report
and
in
the
motion.
C
H
Chairs
council
will
have
several
decision
points
along
the
way
there
will
be.
The
draft
official
plan
in
the
policies
there
would
be
secondary
plans
would
be
the
infra
as
it
relates
to
the
infrastructure
master
plan
and
the
transportation
master
plan
any
front
ending
agreement
that
would
come
out
of
this
any
you
know
additional
work,
so
there
would
be
planning
applications
for
years
to
come
on
this
to
implement
it.
C
A
D
Based
on
mr
mark's
comments,
yes,
I
believe
that
would
be
correct,
as
well
as
the
amending
motion
friendly
amendment
by
glenn.
Gower
will
also
be
included
as
well.
A
Okay,
so
for
everyone,
maybe
we
could
make
that
change.
Okay,
thank
you.
Counselor
hubley,
who
would.
A
Okay,
perfect,
thank
you.
Counselor
teresa
cavanaugh.
P
Teresa
yeah,
thank
you.
Yes,
I'm
looking
at
the
diagrams
that
have
been
sent,
and
I
think
I
share
the
concern
about
the
costs,
because
stafford
pointed
out
that
that's
the
reason
that
they
didn't
choose
this,
that
in
terms
of
of
making
connections,
especially
water
and
sewage,
etc,
and
is
that
is
that
in
a
development
charge.
How
has
that
worked
out
exactly
in
terms
of
the
the
way
you
make
sure
it's
not
costing
the
rest
of
the
city,
the
taxpayers
of
the
city,
to
develop
this
land.
H
So
chairs,
in
the
infrastructure
master
plan,
what
we
would
identify
are
the
necessary
trunk
mains
to
distribute
to
the
area
and
the
pumping
stations
are
required.
I
think,
given
this
very
exceptional
situation,
normally
those
will
be
covered
in
the
city-wide
development
bridges,
but
because
of
the
exceptional
situation,
we'd
be
looking
at
some
sort
of
arrangement
for
an
area
specific
carriages
to
get
to
at
least
a
portion.
If
not
all
of
this
through
that
process
and
the
council's
adopted
fiscal
framework
has
these
costs
covered
through
some
form
of
development
charges.
P
Okay,
thank
you
on
the
map.
It
shows
natural
features.
Rural
features
are:
are
we
going
to
lose
that
are
we
in
terms
of
when
this
land
is
handed
over?
This
is
going
to
be
completely
developed.
What
what
framework
do
we
put
on
to
make
sure
that
we
keep
a
proportion
of
of
natural
development
or
natural
sorry,
natural
features.
H
Chairs
chairs
should
council
adopt
this
motion.
The
next
step,
in
my
mind,
would
be
a
more
rigorous
review
of
the
natural
features
of
the
site.
A
much
more
detailed
mapping
in
those
lands,
like
our
official
plan
already
says,
would
be
excluded
from
development,
and
we
would
be
looking
at
the
lands
that
are
not
in
those
core
natural
heritage
features
and
the
buffers
that
we
normally
put
around
them.
Those
would
be
the
features
and
buffers
would
be
excluded
from
any
development
we'd
be
looking
at
lands
that
are
outside
of
that
to
accommodate
this
land
need.
P
Okay,
so
so
what
I'm
seeing
in
that
orangey
color
is
expected
to
stay
as
natural
features
I
mean
once.
Obviously
you
have
to
re-examine
it.
Is
that
what
you're
saying?
Yes,
that's
what
I'm
saying?
Okay,
but
these
are
a
number
of
landowners.
This
is
not
like,
because
you've
got,
the
pink
is
the
actual
algonquins
of
ontario
own
ownership.
H
So
chairs,
normally
in
an
area,
we
have
an
example
in
the
east
urban
community
right
now,
where
we
but
we're
in
the
process
of
completing
a
secondary
plan
coming
before
council.
The
landowners
get
together
in
a
landowner's
group
that
works
with
the
city
and
they
coordinate
each
other
and
we
work
with
them
and
things
like
master
servicing
studies
are
paid
for
by
the
group.
These
types
of
additional
technical
studies
are
done
by
then.
We
expect
the
proponents
to
step
forward
and
pay
for
these
technical
studies.
For
us
to
do
our
work.
P
And
in
terms
of
transit,
that
was
also
a
weak
point
which
concerns
me
and
how
can
that
be
accommodated?
Is
it
related
to
the
highway
or
is
it?
How
would
that's
something?
That's
a
concern.
H
So
chairs
this
would
be
a
matter
that
need
to
be
studied
further.
What
the
proponents
proposed
in
their
brief
submitted
to
us-
and
we
have
had
confirmation
from
mto-
is
that
mto
would
entertain.
This
is
at
a
staff
discussion.
We
expected
correspondence
in
writing.
It
may
have
already
arrived
and
I
haven't
seen
it
yet
that
the
mto
would
permit
brt
facility
or
bus
dedicated
lanes
on
the
417
in
that
area
to
support
the
city's
transit
system.
H
It
so
mr
herwire
can
correct
me.
I
believe
that
there
have
been
verbal
conversations
with
mto
staff
on
this
and
they've
expressed
willingness.
I
just
I
I
have
not
seen
paper
in
front
of
me
yet,
but
it
would
certainly
be
a
significant
piece,
but
we
expect
that
at
any
time.
P
Okay,
anytime,
so
will
we
have
that
before
council.
H
Just
asked,
mr:
why
don
have
we
have
we
seen
it
yet?
I
don't
know
if
we've
seen
it
yet.
L
L
H
P
Okay,
so
I
think
that
would
be
very
helpful
in
terms
of
making
sure
that
this
is
because
transit
is
extremely
important
and-
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
it's
it's
viable
since
that
is
what
part
of
what
their
you
know.
The
proposal
is,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure.
Okay
all
right.
Thank
you.
That's
it.
A
Before
we
go
to
counselor
libra,
can
I
just
ask
a
question
further
to
what
counselor
cavanaugh
was
asking
when
we
think
about
zibby
and
it
being
planet
one
type
of
community
and
all
the
costs
associated
with
that
who's
best?
Is
anybody
here
best?
A
Maybe
maybe
mr
herwire
is
best
to
speak
to
how
that
ex,
because
that's
a
lot
of
extra
cost-
and
I
know
that
the
a
presentation
that
I
had
from
janet
stavinga
was
and-
and
I
think
lynn
clouche-
was
there
too-
that
it
was
that
they
were
going
to
be
paying
for
this
and
promising
a
planet
one.
So
since
a
lot
of
people
have
asked
questions
about
the
costing
and
stuff,
I'm
just
wondering
what
do
we
know
about
that?
So
what
are
expectations.
L
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
No,
I
think
at
this
point
it's
it's
very
early.
There
is
certainly
a
willingness
to
to
explore
those
options.
Some
of
those
preliminary
thoughts,
you
know,
are
problematic
in
terms
of
not
contributing
to
citywide
dc.
So
all
those
all
that
said,
I
think,
there's
there's
additional
work
on
the
you
know
the
financial
pieces
that
would
have
to
come
between
now
and
and
june.
A
L
Very
sorry,
they
have
been
very
clear
that
that
is
part
of
their
their
mandate
and
they're
in
line
with
their
one
planet
objectives
to
preserve
all
the
green
space.
So
sorry,
I
can
confirm
that
you
know
is
a
stated
objective.
H
Transit
chair,
that's
correct:
they
that
in
their
pr
in
their
proposal,
they
they
indicated
that
they
would
make
an
investment
into
the
bringing
transit
infrastructure
to
the
part
of
their
proposal.
Again,
these
are
things
we
would.
We
would
work
on
with
them.
Should
council
pick
this
as
the
direction.
A
Okay,
I
mean,
and
in
that
presentation
they
also
had
all
of
their
tran
their
transit
going
all
the
way
back
to
boseville.
I
think
so.
If
the
further
to
councillor
kavanaugh
was
talking
about,
you
know,
I
think
it
was
counselor
cavanaugh
about
the
province
and
and
the
role
that
they
could
play.
I
think
that
I
think
that
the
cost
would
be
much
less
than
that
too,
if
they
were
able
to
use
the
417,
but
I
think
that
chair
of
transportation,
tim
tierney,
might
have
more
information
on
that
anyway.
J
Thanks
chair,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
before
we
vote
that
you
know,
I've
got
a
good
grasp
on
on
the
decision
that
we're
making
here
in
total
through
2046.
Can
I
just
confirm
that
the
total
amount
of
net
hectarage
is
supposed
to
be
1320.
J
Correct
the
the
other
option
that
council
has
is
to
distribute
those
1280
1281
in
multiple
small
parcels
around
the
existing
edge
of
the
of
the
city
are
the
majority
of
those
proposed
parcels.
I
think
the
vast
majority
of
those
proposed
parcels
they're
extensions
of
existing
servicing
extensions
of
existing
transit.
L
Thank
you
for
the
question.
I
believe
mr
willis
spoke
to
this
quite
eloquently.
The
bar
haven,
finley,
creek
and
stittsville
lands
are
relatively
simple,
minor
additions
to
existing
infrastructure
and
services.
The
south
march
and
the
orleans
southlands
were
more
complicated,
further
issues
in
terms
of
transit
and
so
on,
and
the
cardinal
creek
was
also
straightforward.
J
I'm
I'm
interested
it
was.
It
was
put
to
me
earlier
that
the
definition
of
sprawl
is
when
you
leap
the
pipe
and
the
only
as
far
as
I
can
tell-
and
I
just
want
to
confirm
this
is
true.
The
only
option
of
the
three
that
actually
leaps,
the
pipe
is
this
taywin
option.
J
H
Maybe
I'll
answer
this
question.
First
of
all,
it's
worth
going
back
to
understand
that
twice
before
council
has
voted
and
directed
staff
to
complete
the
existing
communities
and
find
ends
to
existing
communities
and
then
look
at
a
new
community
that
was
voted
on
in
2017
by
council
as
part
of
the
resolution.
Opa
180
and
it
was
voted
on
last
year
in
may
as
part
of
council's
resolution.
H
So
I'm
not
disputing
what
the
council
is
saying
that,
with
this
would
involve
it'd,
be
very
different
than
continuing
to
extend
the
existing
communities
as
we've
done
in
the
past.
It
would
be
a
significant
change
in
what
ottawa
has
done
since
amalgamation
and
it
would
be
taking
a
pipe
to
a
new
area
and
opening
it
up.
But
I
am
just
reflecting
on
the
fact
that
that
is
consistent
with
what
council
has
told
us
on
prior
occasions
to
do.
J
It's
it's
a
bigger
leap
at
4
45
than
it
was
that
at
2,
20.,
okay,
I'll
I'll,
be
interested
to
hear
what
my
my
colleagues
have
to
say.
But
this
is
you
know
it's
well
worth
considering
very
very
carefully.
A
Okay,
counselor
man,
followed
by.
A
Gower
anyone
else
want
to
speak
to
this
item.
Before
I
go
to
counselor
tyranny,
councillor
man.
F
Sorry,
apologies
god,
long
day,
I'm
finding
this
more
of
a
challenging
issue
to
vote
on
today,
specifically
because
of
the
cost.
I
wish
that
we
had.
You
know
a
dollar
figure
attached
to
what
this
is
going
to
cost
us
because
of
servicing
and
transit.
F
K
Thank
you
chair.
I've
already
spoken
about
the
risk,
so
I
won't
go
into
that
again.
Two
things
I
wanted
to
mention.
One
was
a
lot
of
the
other
decisions
we'd
be
making
about
which
lands
today
are
strictly
on
the
lands,
and
I
do
think
it's
important
that
this
this
group
for
the
taiwan
lands
actually
does
have
a
concept
around
it,
which
is
yeah,
which
is
different
than
I
think
most
of
the
other
properties.
K
But
I
just
wanted
to
comment
on
what
counselor
leaper
raised
around
the
number
of
hectares.
K
I
actually
think
in
this
case,
having
more
hectares
to
see
the
community
with,
would
give
it
a
better
chance
of
succeeding
if
we
decide
to
go
forward.
Two
hundred
and
two
hundred
and
some
hectares
is
about
the
size
of
blackburn,
hamlet
or
glenn
cairn,
twice
that
all
of
a
sudden
is
more
space
for
schools.
K
We
we
do
have
four
school
boards,
for
example,
in
in
ontario,
for
better
or
for
worse,
more
chance
to
properly
protect
the
natural
areas
or
integrate
natural
areas
around
the
community,
more
chance
for
a
greater
variety
of
of
retail
and
employment,
so
having
more
hectares
may
actually
be
a
more
promising
or
a
more
encouraging
thing
in
terms
of
seeding.
A
proper
new
community
that
can,
in
some
ways
is
going
to
have
to
be
self-sustaining
if
we
want
it
to
meet
our
goals
around
transportation
and
mobility.
E
H
E
A
D
Well
great,
thank
you
very
much
chairs
and
thank
you
joint
committee
members
today.
I
think
we've
had
a
very
great
chat
about
this
and
this
is
very
exciting.
Imagine
creating
a
sustainable
community
from
scratch.
When
do
we
ever
have
that
opportunity,
when
you're
trying
to
retrofit
communities
to
make
more
sustainable
and
add
features
it's
near
impossible,
we
have
a
tremendous
opportunity.
It
meets
the
five
big
moves,
that's
the
direction
we
gave
to
staff.
It
meets
the
provincial
policy
statement,
the
proximity
to
the
417.
D
These
are
all
really
important
factors
as
well
as
the
connectivity
laura.
I
even
mentioned
it
amazon's
right
next
door.
We
have
a
good
opportunity
based
on
the
presentations
they've,
provided
us
to
be
able
to
contribute
to
transit
and
to
be
able
to
make
that
connection
to
that
actual
warehouse
facility.
D
The
the
other
side
of
the
connection,
which
is
really
interesting
to
me
during
all
these
discussions
and
presentations,
is
the
ability
to
have
our
what
I
call
a
ghost
station
cereville
station
that
has
no
bus.
Stop
none,
there's
no
bus
that
actually
physically
stops
at
searville.
D
That's
a
good
entry
point
or
connector
for
this
village.
In
the
future,
look,
I
think
you
know
when
you
hear
the
feds
in
the
province
are
are
working
together
on
this
as
well,
and
I'm
I'm
trying
to
leave
the
the
most
important
part
right
to
the
end
is
is
truth
and
reconciliation.
D
We
look
this.
This
is
a
real
opportunity
where
we
can
put
ourselves
on
the
map,
and
while
I
know
that
there's
certainly
some
questions,
we
want
to
get
the
details
still
hashed
out
and
certain
elements
of
it,
and
thank
you,
councillor,
gower,
for
adding
on
that
friendly
amendment.
They're
gonna
come
back
in
june
and
we
need
them
to
come
back
in
june
and
give
us
the
presentation
of
bill.
Look
there's
some
of
us
that
haven't
even
seen
the
presentation.
D
Many
of
us
had
the
benefit
of
really
digging
into
the
weeds.
The
cost
was
one
of
the
first
questions,
but
there
is
no
cost.
They
have
to
borrow
the
costs
themselves.
We
will
see
this
all
come
to
fruition.
I
hope
in
june
and
again
a
very,
very
exciting
project.
Thank
you
very
much
chairs
and
committee
members
today.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Removing
the
motion
we'll
have
yeas
and
nays
on
the
motion.
Councilor
dudas,
yes,
councilor,
tierney,.
D
L
I
L
L
C
K
A
A
So,
where
we
are
now
is
we
are
going
to
the
directions
from
counselor
judas.
We
have
two
of
those
and
you've
already
introduced
them.
Correct.
You
read
them.
I
have
read
them.
Yes,
do
you?
Do
you
want
or
need
to
speak
to
them
as
the
directions
or.
B
Well,
I
think
I
can
speak
to
that.
The
gold
belt
one.
It
really
speaks
to
what
we
heard
from
delegations
yesterday,
there's
just
a
greater
need
for
clarification
about
what
it
really
will
do
and
what
it
will
entail
and
whether
it
whose
hands
it
ties
and
how
it
will
function.
So
you
know
once
again,
staff
were
going
to
be
bringing
back
their
policy
directives
in
june.
B
This
just
adds
to
that
gives
the
public
developers
residents
ourselves
a
little
more
of
an
understanding
as
to
exactly
what
this
will
do
to
protect
our
agricultural
lands
or
aggregate
lands
or
natural
resource
lands,
while
still
allowing
us
to
provide
the
necessary
infrastructure.
So,
basically,
this
one
is
just
putting
a
little
bit
more
meat
on
the
bone.
A
That
sounds
good
and
your
next
one
is
the
one
on
gating.
Yes,
the
one
on
gating.
B
B
So
the
city
has
prioritized
the
need
for
brian
colburn
to
be
extended.
That's
also
going
to
see
that
the
cumberland
transit
waste
build,
but
the
city's
preferred
and
only
affordable
option
option.
Seven
is
currently
being
opposed
by
another
level
of
government.
So
meanwhile
we're
still
seeing
development
in
these
areas.
It's
happening
at
a
rapid
pace
and
there's
no
short-term
solution
to
the
lack
of
infrastructure
in
sight
and,
in
fact,
a
lot
of
these
development
applications
are
currently
citing
construction
of
the
cumberland
transit
way
and
brian
coburn
as
being
imminent,
which
you
know.
B
Sadly,
it's
not
so
what
this
direction
does
is
it
asks
staff
to
identify
the
specific,
gating
roadways,
public
transit
ways
and
active
transportation
facilities
that
would
be
applicable
for
the
approval
of
the
south
orleans
category
one's
land
lands
as
well
as
the
category
two
notre
dame
de
champlains.
Should
those
be
recommended
for
inclusion
within
the
urban
boundary
at
any
point,
and
instead
of
just
building
more
residential
and
hoping
that
one
day
all
this
lacking
infrastructure
is
going
to
catch
up.
A
Thank
you
very
much
well
said,
and
I
can
understand
why
you
added
the
extra
verbiage
to
that
one,
because
you
certainly
are
experiencing
something
in
the
east
end
but
really,
like
I
said
earlier,
a
lot
of
us
are
in
our
necks
of
the
wood,
but
you've
got
a
big
development.
That's
coming
in
there.
I
think
it's
about
290
hectares.
Maybe
all
right!
Thank
you.
I
don't
see
any
more
speakers
or
so
we
are.
I
think,
mr
mark
am
I
at
the
re
back
to
the
report.
Now.
A
A
Too
much
information,
so
what
do
I
need
to
do
with
this
motion?
Can
I
just
say:
do
I
have
to
change
item
number
five,
where
we
have
the
three
choices?
What
do
I
need
to
do?
Can
I
say
on
the
report
as
amended.
A
So
we
will
start.
We
will
do
that,
okay,
so
everyone,
you
have
a
copy
of
the
of
the
agenda
and
the
report
before
us
so
would
so
we're
going
to
have
yeah,
yeas
and
nays
on
the
report
as
amended.
J
J
A
A
K
G
A
No
on
the
whole
report
or
or
you're
just
on
the
the
same
as
the
other
ones,.
C
A
A
A
As
you
heard
earlier,
I
think
it's
the
last
week
of
june,
we'll
be
back
probably
booked
the
entire
week,
for
the
official
plan
in
its
entirety
will
be
back
before
us,
so
lots
of
planning
going
into
that
and
lots
of
work
in
between
now
and
then
and
I'm
sure,
you're
all
up
to
the
challenge
so
on
yep,
so
anyways.
We're
adjourned
thanks
very
much
for
your
attention.
A
Thanks
very
much
melody
thanks
very
much
mr
willis
and
your
whole
team,
and
thanks
to
all
the
people
that
came
out
and
participated
and
all
the
ones
that
have
participated
up
to
this
point
and
will
continue
between
now
and
at
the
end
of
june.