►
Description
Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee meeting – October 1, 2015 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
A
They
take
care
of
our
septic
inspections
on
the
behalf
of
the
City
of
Ottawa.
So
on
the
renewal
of
that
agreements
carried
item
number
6,
that's
the
land,
evaluation
area,
review
updates
and
the
barnesdale
Ontario
miss
of
a
board
decision.
So
we're
gonna
have
a
presentation
on
that's
the
location,
says
West
Carlton
marched
with
us
wrong.
A
Item
number
7
don't
charge
us
for
12
29,
Dwyer,
Hill
Road,
that's
agriculture
will
Affairs
Committee
recommend
a
council
approve
the
development
charges
to
be
imposed
in
worse
act
of
1229
driver
road
as
set
out
in
this
report.
Monyetta
Gary.
Thank
you.
Item
number
eight
protocol
for
wildlife
protection
during
construction.
You
have
a
speaker
on
that
item.
So
we'll
hold
that
item
and
item
number
nine
Mantic
area,
specific
development
charges.
A
So
that
item
is
that
the
agricultural
affairs
committee
recommended
planning
committee
that
council
endorsed
the
bylaw
2014
two
to
nine,
be
revised,
such
that
the
applicability
of
the
area
specific
charge
for
water
and
sanitary
sewer
services
be
in
respect
of
a
revised
schedule.
I
I
guess
one
Iran
hit
it
perfect
attached
his
document
one.
This
is
a.
This
is
an
item
that
goes
back
to
last
year
when
the
city
developed
the
area.
A
Specific
charges
committee
dealt
with
this
in
earlier
this
year
to
direct
staff
to
go
back
and
look
at
it
as
how
it
can
be
assessed
properly
and
essentially
not
charge
people
for
services
they
don't
get,
and
this
is
the
result
of
that.
So
on
that
item
Kerry,
thank
you
very
much
to
staff
for
your
work
on
that
I
appreciate
it
very
much
all
right,
so
we're
gonna
go
back
to
the
that's
it
for
the
regular
agenda.
A
So
I'm
gonna
go
back
to
item
number
three,
which
is
the
flow
miscible
drain
amendments
engineer's
report,
so
just
to
give
some
context.
The
felonious
will
drain
runs
some
north
and
south
of
Burbank
road
and
the
the
intent
of
the
report
is
to
is
to
develop
a
drainage
outlet
for
the
develop.
The
properties
are
being
developed
north
before
a
bank
Road,
and
that
that
during
the
outlet
then
goes
through
the
properties
to
the
south.
So
I
know
we
have
two
speakers
on
the
matter:
Lisa
della
Rossa,
on
behalf
of
cartel
home.
B
I'm,
actually,
here
on
behalf
of
a
number
company
yeah:
no,
it's
not
a
problem,
so
they're
we
are
a
50%
owner
in
that
person's
land
and
I
love.
Yes,
next
last
Tuesday
we
received
the
notice
or
the
actual
report
having
read
through
it.
It's
been
about
a
quick
week
of
learning
the
drainage,
Acton
and
learning
all
about
engineering
and
having
some
of
our
consultants
and
lawyer
review
everything
and
my
indication,
and
everything
is
saying
that,
yes,
we
did
probably
get
notice
of
this
in
August
of
2011
such
as
indicated
in
the
report.
B
B
It
was
sort
of
interesting
to
see
what
was
being
proposed
as
the
implications
for
us
right
now.
We
are
a
rural
piece
of
land,
however,
being
as
close
as
we
are
in
two
bordered
sides
of
of
the
urban
boundary
plus
the
leer
review.
That's
ongoing.
The
potential
is
that
this
piece
of
land
could
form
part
of
the
urban
boundary
down
the
road
down.
The
road
who
knows
question
marks
we
understand
what's
happening
now,
is
that
this
this
drain,
as
we
understand
the
work
that
would
be
done,
wouldn't
increase
the
amount
of
water
going
in
it.
B
It's
just
essentially
the
it's
going
to
be
deeper
and
potentially
have
more
water
more,
but
like
the
same
amount
of
water,
but
more
of
the
time,
so
we're
not
necessarily
intermittent,
and
our
concern
is
yes
what
environmental
issues
could
be
raised
down
the
road
if
this
rain
is
enhanced
right
now,
I'm,
not
aware
whether
it's
fish,
habitat
or
not,
but
those
sorts
of
things
are
high
on
our
radar
down
the
road.
It's
not
just
a
matter
of
the
width
of
the
drain.
B
It
could
be
then
the
setbacks
to
that.
So
the
we're
just
wondering
if
there
is
alternatives
to
doing
the
drain
work
this
way,
what
are
they
and
why
have
they
been
discounted
or
what
other
options
are
available
and
that
our
main
request
to
you
today
is
to
see
whether
or
not
there
is
additional
time
for
us
to
get
our
engineers
to
review
or
look
at
the
implications
or
mean
and
maybe
sit
down
with
the
landowners
to
the
north
and
potentially
come
up
with
some
sort
of
agreement
that
we
can
sort
of.
A
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
and
Seth,
so
I'll,
just
I,
don't
have
another
speaker
but
I'll
just
quickly.
Just
ask
mr.
Robinson
or
mr.
Ryan
to
comments
so
David
Ryan,
of
course,
is
our
drainage
dependent.
Mr.
Robinson
Andy
Robinson
is
is
with
Robertson
consultants.
Who
was
the
engineer
record
for
this?
So
I'll
just
ask
you
to
comment
on
some
of
the
comments
we
just
heard.
C
So
so,
council
appointed
Andy
Robinson
in
2011
and
notices
were
sent
out
as
required
under
the
drainage
act
for
an
on-site
meeting.
Unfortunately,
Cardell
didn't
show
up
at
the
meeting
and
in
the
five
years
since
then,
they
haven't
spoken
to
the
drainage
engineer
directly
to
to
put
forward
any
other
options
and
so
on.
So
it's
unfortunate
that
discussion
didn't
take
place
as
they've
had
five
years
to
kind
of
work.
This
out.
That
being
said,
though,
from
the
technical
aspects
of
Alaska
and
Robinson.
D
A
E
The
planning
portion
has
gone
through
all
of
the
public
input
and
opportunities
at
the
time
it
was
done.
We
had
nothing
to
do
with
that,
so
I
can't
speak
to
the
details
of
it,
but
our
role
really
was
to
amend
the
existing
engineer's
report
to
accommodate
these
changes,
which
is
what
we
have
done
now.
We
did
in
the
process.
E
Query
the
engineer
working
for
the
CRT
lands,
north
of
turn,
Bank
wrote
about
the
concept
of
a
pipe
and,
and
they
respond
and
I
think
reasonably
that
they
thought
that
would
not
be
the
best
way
to
do
it
because
it
sort
of
pipe
in
now.
It
would
accommodate
what
they're
doing
there's
other
issues
with
enclosing
a
drain
which
providing
explos
for
the
hundred
year
or
the
50
year
old
as
well.
E
So
there
would
still
be
additional
requirements,
but
our
thrust
the
time
was
to
try
to
sort
of
specific
eight
some
discussion
between
the
CRT
land,
the
landowners
in
the
south
of
Fernbank,
Road
and
I.
Don't
know
what
happened
on
that,
but
just
so
we've
proceeded
to
do
this.
We're
not
advocating
it
from
the
point
of
view.
If
we
were
doing
a
initial
drain
from
scratch,
we
had
nothing
to
develop.
Then
we
come
up
with
some
designs.
We've
we've
checked
the
designs.
E
We
check
the
flows,
we've
asked
for
some
increases
in
culvert
sizing
and
to
extend
the
the
actual
work.
So
it
goes
through
this
work,
so
Ellen's
land
as
well
further
further
down.
So
at
this
stage,
I
guess
the
other
part
is
that
I
I'm,
not
sure
if,
if
you
delayed
this
or
if
you
refer
to
back
to
us,
you'd
have
to
do
it
with
some
specific
instructions,
because
we
have
no
other
mechanism
to
do
this.
E
But
from
a
timing
point
of
view
there
is
there
is
the
mechanism
I
mean,
there's
a
quarter
revision
which
deals
with
assessments
only,
but
if,
if
a
landowner
is
not
happy
with
the
technical
part
or
app,
the
quarter
revision
not
happy
with
the
decisions
or,
if
they're
not
happy
with
the
allowances
that
have
been
made.
There
is
an
option
of
appealing
through
the
tribunal.
E
Now
the
tribunal
date
is
normally
for
a
landowner
can
put
a
request
in
for
a
tribunal
hearing
on
objections
to
the
tribunal
up
to
40
days
after
the
notice
has
been
mailed
out
for
the
court
revision.
So
this
kind
of
goes
to
Council
and
gets
the
first
reading.
Then
a
date
is
set
generally
within
30
days,
then
for
the
quarter,
even
so
that
once
that
notice
to
stand
out,
the
owners
still
have
48.
E
So
I
guess
all
I'm
saying
is:
there's
quite
a
bit
of
time
for
exam
to
look
at
things
and
just
and
if
they
decide
they
have
to,
they
really
need
to
appeal
it
to
get
a
change
that
has
an
option
of
doing
it
through
the
tribunal.
I'm,
not
sure
right
now,
I
would
say
unless,
unless
some
expressions
came
back
from
counsel
specifically
instructing
us
to
put
a
pike
in
that
we
have
any
mechanism
to
change
that.
So
I
think
there's
still
benefit.
A
So
it's
it's
a
bit
of
a
catch-22
because
I
understand
the
situation
that
sound
that
you
find
yourself
in
Mesa
with
with
the
property
set
with
Fernbank.
But
ultimately
you
know
in
my
mind
all
that
land
is
that
cultural
land,
and
we
deal
with
this
all
the
time
I
mean
the
the
Monahan
dream
is
a
perfect
example.
Just
down
the
road
where
lands
north
of
Hope
side
Road
north
of
Fernbank,
were
needed.
You
know
better
drainage.
An
amendment
is
made
to
the
engineer's
report
to
to
make
modifications
to
the
drain.
A
A
lot
of
the
work
is
done
said,
the
hope
side,
road,
which
is
an
open,
ditch
through
farmland.
So
it's
it's.
It's
a
very
similar
situation
now,
if
something
were
to
happen
in
the
future,
where
amendments
would
want
to
be
made
to
that
drain
that
that
Avenue
is
fully
available
for
you
and
the
reality
is
if
the
land
was
already
developed,
you'd
have
to
go
through
it
anyways
it's
because
you
are
making
changes
to
that
watershed
if
the
land
was
developed.
A
So
ultimately,
instead
of
going
through
the
process
twice,
you
could
just
kind
of
kill
two
birds
with
one
stone
if
that
ever
came
to
be
where
that
land
was
to
be
developed.
So
knowing
that
the
opportunity
is
there
it's
hard
for
me
to
suggest
going
back
and
revisiting
it
now,
because
there
is,
there
is
no
avenues
plus
worst
case
scenario.
You
can
always
appeal
to
a
tribunal,
but
you
would
have
to
bring
forward
and
think
again
said
some
sort
of
alternative
to.
A
D
I
think
mr.
chair
Tygart
has
an
interest
in
the
lands
that
drain
into
this
piece
of
property
were
partners
with
two
other
developers,
Jim
Berto
and
third
to
us
here
as
well.
I
find
it
ironic
that
previous
speaker
indicates
that
she
got
some
notice
by
days
ago.
Well,
over
a
year
ago,
representatives
of
our
companies
met
with
cartel
tried
to
secure
an
arrangement
with
them.
To,
in
fact,
do
this
work.
D
They
refused
to
accept
the
work
that
was
proposed
to
be
done
on
their
property,
indicating
that
this
was
urban
land
and
that
they
wanted
us
to
pay
them
about
three
hundred
thousand
dollars
an
acre
because
it
was
urban
land
which
we
felt
was
a
little
bit
ridiculous.
So,
notwithstanding
the
fact
that
we
couldn't
come
to
an
arrangement
with
them,
I
reached
out
at
least
a
half
a
dozen
times
to
Greg
Gramm,
the
president
of
cartel
in
Ottawa,
he
refused
to
return
my
phone
calls
I
called
Ryan
okie,
the
owner
of
Cardo.
In
Calgary.
D
A
All
right,
thank
you
very
much,
do
have
any
questions
for
mr.
Phillips
any
further
questions
for
for
Andy
or
D.
No,
all
right
so
I
mean
obviously
a
I'd
say
my
comments
cup
minutes
ago.
I
think
it's
I
think
it's
makes
sense
to
go
forward
with
the
with
the
engineer's
report
as
it's
written
here.
Knowing
that
there
is
avenues
later
on,
should
those
opportunities
arise.
F
This
is
I'm
finna,
be
a
slideshow
presentation.
I
have
a
number
of
slides
which
have
maps
and
things
on
them,
which
I'll
talk
to
briefly
that
I
have
okay,
I
have
provided
a
number
of
maps
on
this
slideshow
presentation
and
I'll
go
to
talk
to
the
report
that
I
all
the
information
report
that
I
provided
to
the
committee.
F
F
Got
two
topics:
basically
one
is
the
Barnsdale
Road
hearing
and
I'll
cook
that
and
the
second
part
of
this
is
and
it's
a
related
matter
is
the
update
of
the
cities
layer,
which
is
the
methodology
we
use
to
determine
the
prime
agricultural
lands
in
the
City
of
Ottawa.
The
Barnsdale
application
was
an
up.
The
private
application
by
landowners
along
farms,
Dale
Road,
just
south
of
the
community
by
the
land,
was
designated
agricultural
resource
area
back
in
1997
in
the
defender
region,
Official
Plan
the
application
applied
to
read
Eze
ignite
this
land
to
general
rural
area.
F
It
was
supported
by
an
assessment
and
agricultural
assessment
that
looked
at
the
soil
capability.
It
did
an
evaluation
based
on
the
city's
leer
model,
which
is
a
model
that
looks
at
the
soil
capability
for
agriculture
and
also
looks
at
the
the
implications
or
the
location
of
the
land
in
relation
to
conflicted
land
uses.
So
it
comes
up
with
a
scoring
system
that
determines
whether
or
not
it
should
be
protected
for
agricultural
purposes
or
not
under
that
system,
and
the
analysis
done
by
their
consultant
is
the
land
did
not
meet
that
minimum
requirement
for
agriculture
protection.
F
The
city
rejected
the
application
on
the
basis
that
or
two
basis,
primarily
one
is
that
the
city
was
undertaking
it's
the
real
review
and
that
this
sort
of
changed
to
the
agriculture
is
law,
so
it
should
be
done
comprehensively
and
not
individually,
and
secondly,
because
it's
inconsistent
with
the
provincial
policy
statement,
which
states
that
land
should
not
be
removed
from
an
agricultural
resource
area
unless
it's
to
be
used
purposes.
In
this
particular
case,
the
intent
was
to
simply
change
the
designation
to
general
rule.
F
F
The
board
didn't
directly
address
the
the
provincial
policy
statement
matter,
but
considered
that
this
was
a
boundary
condition
and
that,
in
the
board's
opinion,
barnesdale
Road
constituted
the
reasonable
boundaries
for
the
agricultural
resource
area
and
that
the
general
rule
designation
acted
as
a
buffer
between
the
agricultural
resource
area
and
the
urban
boundary.
Notwithstanding
that
sometime
in
the
future,
this
would
potentially
be
over
so
the
board
found
no.
It
did
not
agree
with
the
city's
position
and
subsequently
has
ordered
that
the
designation
be
amended
and
staff
is
preparing
that
amendment
to
go
back
to
the
board.
F
You
can
see
in
1997.
This
is
a
copy
of
the
column,
the
Lear
map.
It
was
done
back
in
the
nineties
at
that
time,
the
Theoden
boundary
was.
It
was
further
from
this
land.
The
white
area
to
the
north
is
what
was
done
at
that
time,
and
you
can
see
that
the
capability
of
the
land
holdings
at
that
time
did
meet
the
men
and
them
scoring.
But
when
you
look
at
the
fragmentation,
that's
occurred
as
a
result
of
the
new
urban
boundary,
and
this
is
what
it
looks
like
today.
F
You
can
see
the
hatched
area
is
actually
an
expansion
area
that
council
agreed
to
in
2009.
That
include
will
eventually
become
part
of
the
butter
and
our
Haven
community.
So
you
can
see
it
fragments
that
that
original
agricultural
area
up
into
a
number
small,
parcel
and
individually,
these
small
parcels
do
not
wait
as
well
and
turn
to
the
city
for
your
assistance.
F
So
this
is
basically
moving
from
the
bonds
bail
to
two
Tulear
on
the
Left.
We
have
abate
a
breakdown
of
what
the
lien
means
and
they
like
right
about
before
ble
component
that
looks
at
the
site
based
on
its
capability
for
agriculture
and
ranks
stops
the
soil
types
classes
one
through
seven.
The
area
review
looks
at
things
that,
like
lot
size,
conflicted
land
uses
proximity
to
uses.
That
would
cause
a
conflict
with
agriculture
in
the
future.
F
It
also
looks
at
curve
and
past
agricultural
use,
and
things
like
that,
so
the
lives,
the
lien
model-
needs
to
be
updated.
The
lien
model
we
have
at
the
moment
is
is
outdated,
only
slightly
updated.
Most
of
the
criteria
that
we
use
are
still
used
in
the
the
current
lien
model.
It's
recommended
by
the
province,
except
for
one
and
the
one
characteristic
that
will
probably
change
in
the
new
lire
is
that
land
adjacent
to
a
village
or
an
urban
area
under
the
currently
is
actually
devalued.
F
G
F
We
also
started
in
2014
in
an
effort
to
try
and
work
out
these
problems
and
possibly
even
get
new
assault,
so
I'm
not
being
done
for
the
city
with
a
pilot
exercise
looking
at
soils,
basically
in
the
west
of
the
city
into
9
kilometers
square
areas.
That
work
is
ongoing.
The
provinces
continuously
don't
work
through
this
year
and
because
there
was
this
direction
to
look
at
a
solution
that
gets
us
to
2017
completion,
we
started
to
look
at.
F
So
just
as
an
example
of
what
we
found
with
the
most
recent
mapping.
This
is
the
1997
soil
capability.
Mapping
that
we
have.
This
is
all
good
and
we're
looking
at
the
basically
the
southeast,
the
southeast
of
the
City
of
Ottawa.
At
this
point,
you
can
see
the
the
coloring
of
the
soils.
The
each
of
these
shapes
is
a
basically
a
soil
group
and
the
coloring
ranks
the
soil
in
terms
of
its
capability
for
agriculture.
F
Okay,
so
the
darker
Brown,
this
there's
there's
three
two
three
hi
class,
the
class
1
2
and
3-
goes
from
dark
brown,
there's
very
little
dark
brown,
as
you
can
see
on
the
map,
because
desert
it'll
cross
once
a
little
and
then
there's
this
class
2
is
the
mid
brown
and
then
the
class
3.
Is
the
white
man
now
jump
back
to
the
new
information?
F
You
can
still
see.
There's
the
dark
brown
there's
a
bit
up
tip
the
intersection
just
in
the
southeast
corner
bit.
Instead
it
with
Jones
and
Bank.
But
if
you
look
at
the
land
to
the
east,
you'll
see
that
there's
a
lot
more
class,
2
and
class
3,
it's
a
lot
less
and
it's
down
in
the
bottom
and
go
back.
You
can
see
that
the
class
2
in
this
case
is
in
the
bottom
end
and
the
class
3
is
in
the
middle
and
there's
a
lot
less
of
the
class,
the
class
3
in
that
particular
case.
F
F
F
F
F
They
don't
have.
They
don't
have
an
explanation
for
why
these
changes.
So
that's
what
we're
trying
to
figure
out.
So
one
of
the
possibilities
is:
if
we,
if
we
go
with
the
existing
data,
maybe
these
are
the
areas
where
we
do
some
additional
soil
sampling
to
confirm
what
what
what
really
happened
here,
because
going
forward
we're
going
to
have
we
can
have
if
we
move
forward
this
information,
which
is
supposed
to
be
the
one
that's
been
recommended
by
the
problem.
We're
gonna
have
a
lot
of
angry
land
on
anyway.
A
H
Minutes
just
just
couldn't
see
it.
Thank
you
cheer,
Moffat
I'm
glad
you
left
that
particular
mapping
up
I'm,
the
president
of
the
magic
village
and
Community
Association,
and
when
I
saw
this
particular
report,
I
started
getting
really
worried,
worried
for
our
village,
our
rural
village
of
magnetic
and
I.
H
Typically,
a
suspender
and
belt
type
of
guy
I.
Don't
want
to
pat
my
pants
to
fall
down
so
when
looking
at
for
the
village
of
magnetic
to
retain
its
rural
character,
I
would
like
to
have
more
than
just
the
assurance
of
the
value
of
the
farmland
between
the
urban
boundary
and
the
village
boundary
to
be
the
protector
of
the
rural
character
of
magnetic
I
would
like
to
see
something.
H
Additional
I
would
like
to
see
a
policy
from
the
city
that
ensures
the
urban
rural
character
of
the
village
of
Manitou
to
have
a
farm
buffer
right
now
we
have
a
offer
of
one
kilometer
for
expansion
of
the
village
boundary
I'm,
asking
for
a
two
kilometer
buffer
for
farmland
to
retain
the
character
of
the
village
of
mana
tick.
Now,
look
at
this
map.
I
see
also
north
of
the
village
of
magnetic
the
quality
of
the
soils
being
less
than
they
were
in
the
in
the
earlier
diagram.
H
The
1997
or
whatever
was
I,
see
changes,
and
that
worries
me.
It
worries
me
in
terms
of
the
ability
of
developers
to
cut
and
slice
and
dice
to
get
closer
to
mana,
take
and
then
to
consume
annotate
within
the
urban
boundary.
So
I
would
ask
conservation
from
this
committee
for
a
farm
effort
between
the
urban
boundary
and
the
village
romantic.
Thank
you.
A
Hey
you
I
know:
you've
made
that
submission
into
as
part
of
our
Mansi
Secretary
plan
as
well
and
I.
Don't
think
staff
have
formated
response
as
of
yet
but
I
know
that
they
will,
as
part
of
that
secondary
plan
review,
but
I
appreciate
your
comments.
I
know
that
the
land
north
of
Mantic
is
designated
as
class
2
at
cultural
land,
and
there
is
there's
some
discrepancy,
maybe
in
these
in
these
maps.
A
But
that's
why
that's
why
staff
are
doing
the
work
they're
doing
on
the
lire
and
spending
the
extra
time
to
make
sure
that
we
get
these
numbers
shored
up,
because
everything
we've
seen
so
far
shows
that
that
land
similar
to
the
land
south
of
Hope
side,
road,
our
class
to
agricultural
land.
So
any
sort
of
suggestion
that
it's
not
I
think
requires
extra
extra
work
to
confirm
that
it
really
is
so
that
we
don't
have
these
situations
in
the
future.
A
I
I
Obviously,
there's
been
no
conclusion
to
now
lost
and
OMB
appeal
as
a
result
of
it.
I
have
two
developers,
who've
already
told
me:
they're
gonna
apply
for
re-designation.
In
my
end
on
similar
type
lands,
similar
circumstances,
you
know
adjacent
to
existing
subdivisions,
etc,
etc,
etc,
and
I
have
no
confidence
that
we'll
be
able
to
defend
those
given
this
decision.
So
why
is
it
taking
so
long.
F
Well,
we
require
we
require
the
information
to
be
able
to
do
the
assessment.
We're
developing
the
model
is
not
a
big
issue
that
is
part
of
that
development.
Each
time
we
did
an
iteration
and
tested
the
model.
We
tested
it
with
information
to
say
that
the
model
itself
like
I
said
beyond
me.
The
only
real
variable
that
is
definitely
going
to
change
through
the
update
of
Lear
is
going
to
be
how
land
is
ranked
adjacent
to
an
urban
is
really
founded.
There
are
the
the
guidelines
provided
by
the
province.
F
Give
us
a
fair
range
of
a
criteria
that
we
can
use
the
don't
early
model,
but
be
the
work
that
was
done
between
2010
and
2012.
Basically
has
a
model
very
similar
to
what
we
have
now.
So
it's
not
the
model.
What's
the
big
issue,
it's
what's
what
they
put
into
the
model
to
get
to
the
results
that
you
need
to
determine
the
agricultural
night
good
night,
2009
information,
because
we
have
only
two
pieces
of
data.
F
I
F
It's
old,
but
it's
all
based
on
the
same
soil,
much
soil
matter,
so
the
changes
that
occurred
in
2009
somebody
sat
down
at
some
point
and
said:
we
don't
think
affect
soil
capabilities
break
it.
May
it
may
well
be
current.
This
may
well
be
correct
information,
so
we've
got
no
documentation
saying
why
the
church
and
the
ministry
is
not
able
to
give
us
that
documentation.
F
I
F
F
F
F
So
that's
what's
concerns
us
and
we
were
trying
to
eat
we're,
trying
to
get
to
a
point
where
we
can
defend
whatever
recommendations
we
make
in
terms
of
agriculture
there.
Now
we
have,
we
have
soil
experts
out
doing
sampling
this
year
and
that
sort
of
thing
out
doing
some
work
and
what
we're
suggesting
through
this
process
is
that
we
have
an
opportunity,
maybe
to
test
this
area
and
confirm
whether
or
not
this
information
is
correct.
Now
this
is
just
these
are
just
a
significant
area.
There
are
changes
elsewhere
in
the
city
as
well
sure.
A
I
I
get
this
is
this
is
the
point
of
me
getting
it
right
in
the
environment
where
we
are
today,
we
can't
defend
our
current
status
because
we
haven't
done
a
leer
and
we
just
lost
the
case,
and
the
companies
that
are
next
are
going
to
be
going
through
what
happened.
If
that
would
be
decision
and
they're
gonna
use
it
against
us
at
the
fringes
of
Orleans
and
probably
the
fringes
in
Kanata
and
maybe
more
fringes
here
and
buried
the
longer.
I
G
I
C
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
presentation
and
I
wasn't
here
before,
but
this
is
a
really
troubling
information
and
I.
Remember.
We
spoke
about
the
layer
before,
but
let
me
ask
you
a
question:
isn't
it
the
Lea
study
that,
with
on
in
1997,
and
basically,
we
updated
in
1999?
These
are
the
these
are
the
mechanisms
we
govern
our
Google
al
and
with.
F
What
the
what
the
lid
does
is
enables
us
to
identify
the
prime.
What's
the
province
calls
the
Toymaker
cultural
areas,
the
problems
the
3
PS
identifies
to
two
elements:
one
is
prime
land.
Prime
land
is
class,
1,
2
or
3
land.
Prime
agricultural
areas
are
primarily
classes
1/2
inch
real
and
that
it
can
include
lower
quality
1.
What
lead
does
it
gives
us
a
mechanism
to
determine
what
those
areas
should
be
perfect.
C
C
We're
gonna
have
all
the
developer
coming
all
of
and
that's
going
to
create
more
issues
to
communities
and
in
our
rural
area,
so
I'm
not
sure
what
we're
trying
to
do
here,
but
this
is
really
troubling
information
and
I
really
like
to
have
if
we
can
put
some
policies
or
mechanism
by
the
way.
So
we
can
tie
it
up
this.
These
developments
control
well.
F
J
J
J
There
is
more
than
likely
to
be
in
accordance
with
what
the
city
has
within
its
official
plan
through
the
layer
analysis
right
now,
so
I,
don't
I
I,
don't
think
that
vast
swaths
of
land
are
at
risk,
but
there
are
going
to
be
parcels
in
in
some
locations
where
people
are
going
to
be
able
to
rely
on
this
decision,
and
there
is
a
need
for
the
city
to
move
forward
with
being
able
to
validate
soil
capabilities.
But
for
that
we
have
to
rely
on
on
what
the
problems
that
provided
us
with.
A
And
so
just
sorry
just
to
be
clear
on
that,
then,
just
because
somebody
owns
class,
two
or
three
a
cultural
hand
up
against
the
air
battery
doesn't
mean
they
can
go
use
the
Barnsdale
decision,
which
is
class
five
or
six
agricultural
lands
as
a
way
to
rezone
those
lamps.
That
is
correct
me
to
be
it
be
only
if
it's
a
precedent
it's
only
like
for
like
that
is
correct.
Mr.
A
H
F
F
F
F
F
F
Me
go
into
that
spot
in
more
detail.
If
you
look
at
the
what
I've
suggested
in
the
report
is
that
by
the
first
I
think
it's
the
first
or
second
quarter
of
2016.
We
should
be
able
to
have
a
model
to
use
for
it,
because
we've
done
a
lot
of
the
work
we're
going
to
have
to
really
initiate
the
steering
committee
or
the
working
group,
and
we
go
back
through
and
we'll
get
it
I
recommended
the
Lea
model
to
council
early
2016
is.
H
F
H
J
Mr.
chair
I
tried
to
be
a
optimistic
person
and
I
am
by
nature,
but
skepticism
does
come
into
my
mind
from
time
to
time,
and
so
the
risk
in
inviting
landowners
to
do
the
testing
is
that
the
only
landowners
that
will
come
forward
with
the
testing
are
those
who
are
seeking
to
get
the
land
out
of
the
agricultural
resource.
Designation
I
think
it's
highly
unlikely
that
someone
who
had
general
land
and
thinks
maybe
it's
a
little
bit
could
be
classified
as
agricultural
resource.
It's
very
unlikely
that
person
is
going
to
come
forward.
H
H
H
F
We
want
to
do.
We
are
doing
that
now.
Like
I
said
we
did
some
testing
in
2014.
The
ministry
has
obtained
doing
some
testing
vitiate
east
of
the
lido.
What
I've
suggested
in
the
report
is
that
we
develop
the
lien
model
and
get
some
certainty
in
terms
of
what
our
model
is
going
to
be
moving
for
soils
aside,
but
let's
not
get
to
the
soils
just
yet
get
the
model
a
bit
developed
run
the
model,
even
if
we
use
the
2010
2009
2010
data
run
the
model
with
that
data
get
alia
map
which
is
alright.
F
These
are
the
these.
Are
the
properties
that
score
high
in
terms
of
their
soil
capability
and
circulate
that
in
consult
on
that
with
the
public?
That's
when
we're
going
to
hear
people
scream
about
their
land
potentially
becoming
agriculture,
yes,
give
them
the
opportunity
at
that
point
to
come
in
and
say
all
right.
F
F
Yes'm,
oh,
but
what
with?
What
we're
suggesting?
Is
that
the
the
guys
that
have
been
doing
work
for
us
in
2014
and
they
still
up
there
now
have
developed
a
testing,
a
standardized
testing
model
which
includes
the
way
the
data
is
stored.
The
data
is
collected
in
their
daughter's
analyzed
and
what
we'd
like
to
do
is
to
say
alright.
F
We
only
pass
to
your
class
responsibility
could
be
actually
in
the
format
that
we
can
put
into
the
database
that
tends
part
of
the
COI
mapping
and
is
approved
by
the
province
is
willing.
It
will
breathe
like
to
buy
the
patents,
and
then
they
can
use
it
for
any
additional
work
that
they
do
here
in
the
city
of
art.
F
The
second
thing
that
would
be
important
on
that
would
be
that,
as
part
of
that,
understanding
is
that,
if
necessary,
because
of
beef
is
a
huge
conflict
between
what
information
is
that
we
received
from
the
landowner
and
what
we've
got
and
or
could
reasonably
expect,
then
we
want
to
be
able
to
get
access
to
sites
to
check
that,
which
is
something
we
don't
have
now
now
the
other
the
other
component
of
this
and
what
plates
define
is
there?
Aren't
that
many
people
left
in
Ontario
that
can
do
this?
F
H
H
F
Of
it,
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why,
if
we
develop
the
model
and
then
have
this
period
of
time
when
people
have
gone
off,
but
you
need
to
provide
input,
they've
done
to
have
to
allow
enough
time
for
people
to
actually
get
to
set
them
down
on
the
side.
I
know,
there's
a
number
of
land
on
this,
avoiding
head
kiss
work
done
that
there'll
be
a
lot
of
people
who
haven't.
H
So
why
my
last
question
mr.
chair
is
going
to
be:
why
aren't
we
taking
a
risk
management
approach
for
this
insane?
Okay,
these
are
the
lands
are
highest
at
risk.
That's
all
we're
gonna
focus
on.
You
said
earlier
that
you
don't
disagree
with
Barnsdale,
so
why
are
we
wasting
any
time
on
that
at
all?
Why
don't
we
just
identify
the
highest
risk
area,
as
we
think
we
might
be
able
to
build
a
case
and
get
in
there
and
get
it
done
in
six
months
dealt
with
Padma?
Why
are
we
saying
2017.
H
A
D
Roughly
boo,
counselor
play
and
staff
through
I
thought
a
very
thorough
process.
I
still
have
never
been
told
what
it
is.
That
was
wrong
with
it,
with
the
data
from
oMAFRA
every
other
municipality
in
the
province
of
Ontario,
as
was
the
amount
from
that
data
and,
in
fact,
I've
got
correspondence
from
a
my
for
themselves.
Saying
they've
never
been
told
what's
wrong
with
the
data
either
so
I'm
perplexed
by
all
of
a
sudden
at
the
end
of
almost
two
years
of
working
with
staff.
D
What
is
wrong
with
the
data
still
haven't,
had
an
answer
like
the
gentleman
from
an
attic
I
to
think
that
there
are
significant
amounts
of
lands
that
need
to
be
protected
around
the
boundary
of
the
City
of
Ottawa,
perhaps
for
slightly
different
reasons.
He
wants
to
keep
the
village
the
way
it
is
I,
actually
care
about
the
food
for
my
kids
and
there
is
a
significant
amount
of
purchasing
of
land.
That's
going
on
outside
the
boundary,
that
is,
prime
agricultural
land.
D
That
needs
to
be
protected,
and
so,
as
a
person
in
that
we're
working
group
who
spent
two
years
of
my
time,
it's
disappointing
to
find
out
all
of
a
sudden
without
any
notice
that
a
committee
is
cancelled.
Having
said
that,
we
have
subsequently
appealed
the
Official
Plan
150.
One
of
the
reasons
why
we
we
have
appealed.
That
is
because
the
city
took
out
the
criteria
unless
I
stand
to
be
protected,
correct
that
mr.
Marc
might
correct
me
took
out
the
criteria
to
screen
out
agricultural
land
in
an
evaluation
of
looking
at
what
could
be
urban.
D
So
again,
from
my
perspective
of
somebody
who
has
recommended
to
our
principles:
not
to
buy
agricultural
land
run
the
risk
of
being
uncompetitive
with
other
developers,
because,
in
my
opinion,
the
city
has
weakened
its
position,
both
by
delaying
this
leer
work
and
secondly,
by
taking
out
parts
of
the
Official
Plan
that
protected
agricultural
land.
I.
A
J
Jarrett,
what
was
done
so
just
going
back
to
the
history?
A
little
bit
is
that
in
oh
seven,
oh
eight,
oh
nine
criteria
were
developed
for
the
evaluation
of
land
determined,
whether
or
not
it
would
be
brought
in
the
urban
boundary,
and
at
that
time
the
it
was
only
residential
land
that
was
identified
as
being
needed,
and
so
the
city
utilized
that
criteria
it
was.
It
was
a.
It
was
a
policy
analysis,
but
staff
had
never
brought
it
into
the
official
plan.
It
was
used
as
a
working
document.
J
The
board
in
its
decision
on
OPA
76,
required
that
it
be
inserted
into
the
Official
Plan,
but
that
was
never
the
city's
position
that
it
should
be
and
it
became
an
x-15
just
to
put
a
title
to
it.
Mr.
Phillips
is
correct.
One
of
the
items
of
annex
15
is
an
automatic
screening
out
of
agricultural
resource
land.
One
does
not
even
look
at
it,
but
Anik
15
covers
a
whole
lot
of
other
criteria.
J
Also,
there's
16
or
17
criterion
total,
an
annex,
15
and
so
moving
forward
to
whenever
there
is
a
need
to
add
line
to
the
urban
area,
whether
it
be
for
residential
non-residential
purposes,
it
was
a
position
of
staff,
as
endorsed
by
counsel,
that
annex
15
is
not
necessarily
what
should
be
utilized
next
time.
There
should
be
an
opportunity
to
write
a
new
set
of
criteria
based
upon
the
review.
J
A
J
A
D
A
D
The
final
part
of
what
I
was
going
to
say
was
with
respect
to
the
Lear
working
group.
Mr.
Finley
indicates
that
staff
are
diligently
working
away
on
mapping
no
disrespect
to
staff,
but
to
then
formulate
a
committee
that
is
going
to
have
a
map
in
front
of
it
that
has
been
developed
by
some
consultant
with
staff
who
have
basically
worked
in
a
I.
Don't
want
to
use
the
board
back
room
inappropriately,
but
basically
worked
at
City
Hall.
Without
the
efforts
of
that
sphere,
leader
working
group
causes
a
bit
of
suspicion
in
cynicism,
like
mr.
D
Marcus
suggested
you
probably
are
not
going
to
get
developers
coming
forward.
Saying
here's
the
classification
of
my
land
by
the
same
token,
I,
think
the
appropriate
way
to
formulate
any
new
map
is,
is
the
way
you
do
everything
else
in
the
city.
We
work
together
as
a
committee,
and
we
review
the
data
the
same
as
the
staff
are,
so
that
when
a
map
is
produced,
everybody
knows
just
like
the
previous
clear
working
group.
Everybody
knows
that
yep.
We
all
agree
that
this
is
the
right
map.
D
I
can
tell
you
right
now
that
if
a
map
is
dropped
in
front
of
a
bunch
of
us
six
months
or
two
years
from
now
that
says
here
we
are.
This
is
now
what
we're
going
to
start
with.
The
first
fight
is
going
to
be
over
the
map.
Lastly,
just
if
I
can
be
indulged,
mr.
mark
is
correct.
Staff
can
bring
forward
a
report
identifying
whatever
they
want
when
they
look
at
reviewing
the
Official
Plan.
D
A
I
15
sure,
which
makes
lots
of
sense
so
in
taking
it
out
of
okie
150
if
it
gets
approved
and
then
five
ten.
Whatever
years
from
now,
we
do
another
LP
to
bring
lands
in
and
it's
not
there,
but
we
use
it
as
a
screening
method.
Would
the
OMB
then
not
rule
again
that
it
should
be
in
the
Oh
in
the
opie
if
we're
using
it
as
a
screening
method?
Aren't
we
just
replicating
the
exact
same
situation?
Is
basically
one
what
a
mess.
J
Mr.
chair,
there
is
no
doubt
that
the
provincial
policy
statement
provides
protection
to
prime
agricultural
area.
The
question
is
moving
moving
forward.
Seven
years,
let's
say
we're.
Looking
at
an
analysis
is
completed
in
2022
is,
could
there
be
some
compelling
rationale?
That's
why
the
city
might
wish
to
look
at
agricultural
area
as
I
see
if
here
today,
I
can't
tell
you
that
there
would
be
because
I
don't
know
what
that
what
that
compelling
rationale
might
be
but
might
at
what
might
the
city
wants
at
least
to
be
able
to
consider
it?
I
See
your
point
mr.
mark
I'm,
just
I,
don't
recall
that
taking
that
out
was
a
large
point
of
discussion
around
the
council
Table
one.
He
hope
it
was
approved
and
I
would
bet.
If
you
were
to
poll
the
24
elected
officials
very
few,
if
any
of
them
would
realize
that
that
had
actually
in
fact
been
removed
from
the
old
Pete
I
think
everyone
is
operated
on
the
basis
that
all
other
lands
must
be
considered.
First
and
using
a
Glens
is
the
absolute
last
resort
and
I
will
leave
it
at
that.
A
J
Appendix
at
all,
with
annex
15
in
there
one
has
removed
entirely
the
possibility
of
looking
at
agricultural
land
yeah.
It
is
off
the
table.
If
you
take
out
an
x-15,
there
are
a
series
of
tests
that
you
must
go
through,
but
you
at
least
have
the
option
of
going
through
those
tests
with
Anik
15.
You
don't
even
go
through
those
tests.
A
A
A
C
A
G
C
F
F
F
F
A
Right
and
I
understand
a
challenge:
if
you
have
the
two
maps,
how
did
you
get
to
both
maps
and
that's
the
question
right?
If
you,
if
you
sit,
if
you
put
the
two
maps
in
front
of
the
ones
that
you
have
the
97
in
the
2009,
if
you
put
them
in
front,
the
question
is
going
to
be
to
you:
how
did
you
get
to
those
two
and
the
fact
is
you
don't
have
an
answer:
yeah
all
right,
Thank
You,
mr.
A
Phillips,
so
obviously
we
have
more
to
talk
about,
but
I
know
I'm
a
member
of
the
working
group
accountable.
A
has
been
a
member
in
the
past
as
well.
So
well.
We
convene
that
working
group
and
in
the
next
three
months
and
we'll
getting
updated,
we'll
move
forward
on
from
there
any
other
questions
on
that
matter.
No,
if
you're
wondering
why
I
might
have
laughed
while
mr.
Marquess
was
speaking,
the
deaths
fell
apart
so
and
it
fell
apart
in
my
lap.
So
this
is
why
you
may
have
seen
me
laughing
it.
A
So
I
sipped
the
regular
Jane
I'm,
sorry
in
camera,
I'm
a
story-
if
you
have
thumb
for
me,
I
have
a
couple:
oh,
my
goodness,
my
apologies
I'll
caught
up
in
that
I
think
number
eight.
The
protocol
for
wireless
protection
during
construction.
We
do
have
one
speaker,
donít
agree
with
the
president
Carl
wildlife
center,
so
I
know
you
also
spoke
at
plane.
Commune,
solid
presentation,
planning
committee.
So
I
won't
bore
you
again
with
the
presentation
but
happy
to
provide
you
an
opportunity
to
speak.
G
A
G
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
comment
I
think.
While
we
with
respect
to
the
construction
protocol,
we
support
the
recommendations,
but
we're
very
concerned
that
it
has
been
watered
down
with
the
removal
of
the
requirement
for
developers
to
have
to
submit
a
wildlife
mitigation
plan
and
also
construction
site
management
plan.
Both
we
think
are
reasonable
requirements
to
reduce
harm
to
wildlife.
Replacing
these
requirements
with
only
best
practices
guidelines
will
change
nothing
and
what
is
a
very
deadly
environment
for
wildlife
unless
these
best
practices
are
actually
implemented.
G
G
I
know
counsel
Carrie's,
not
here,
but
some
of
you
were
called
when
a
wildlife
strategy
which
is
kind
of
the
umbrella,
if
you
like,
was
approved
by
Iraq
back
in
2013,
the
wildlife
construction
protocol
was
identified
as
a
long
overdue
priority
at
that
time,
having
first
been
approved
by
regional
government
back
15
years
ago.
So
it's
not
a
new
initiative.
You
recall
that
the
wildlife
strategy
you
approved
was
centered
on
wildlife,
sensitive
planning.
G
Well,
we
feel
that
the
wildlife
construction
protocol
is
going
to
be
the
first
real
test
of
the
city's
commitment
to
wildlife
sent
to
the
planet
with
respect
to
the
process.
I
do
want
to
make
a
comment.
You'll
also
recall
for
those
people
that
were
on
Iraq
at
the
time
when
you
approved
on
the
wildlife
strategy
that
a
lengthy
report
was
in
front
of
you.
That
report
talked
and
summarized
the
results
of
a
public
consultation.
It
included
written
submissions
and
as
well
those
were
in
support
and
opposed
along
with
staff
comment.
G
We
have
been
working
with
cities
like
London,
Ontario
and
Edmonton
Alberta
cities
that
are
not
afraid
to
be
first
in
line
when
it
comes
to
protecting
wildlife
and
the
environment.
Edmonton,
for
example,
has
recently
won
international
and
national
awards
for
incorporating
wildlife
passage,
design
into
its
transportation
and
drainage
planning.
It
has
built
27
wildlife
passages
since
implementing
the
program
nine
years
ago.
Edmonton
didn't
say
no
one
else
is
doing
this,
so
why
should
they?
G
They
saw
a
need
and
did
the
right
thing,
reducing
costly
wildlife
collisions
by
51%
in
the
process,
even
though
they
have
had
clearly
200%
or
200
200,000
increase
in
population,
as
well
as
a
lot
of
road
infrastructure
to
accommodate
that
population.
Edmonton's
leadership
have
gained
the
support
of
developers
in
that
community.
We
were
speaking
to
several
of
them,
and
the
community
were
90
in
a
survey
conducted
within
the
community.
G
97
percent
of
the
community
learned
such
strong
support
of
this
initiative,
I'd
like
to
summarize
by
saying
that
Ottawa
has
an
opportunity
to
be
first
with
respect
to
an
effective
wildlife
construction
protocol,
and
we
urge
you,
as
councillors,
to
ensure
that
this
is
not
another
missed
opportunity.
Thank
you.
A
A
It
has
changed
over
time
as
to
how
it
was
first
conceived
seven
months
ago
to
now,
but
in
terms
of
the
tools
like
I,
don't
I
wouldn't
necessarily
agree
that
staff
don't
have
the
tools
I
think
they
have
the
ability
to
look
at
each
and
every
application
on
its
own
merits
and
determine
you
know
what
what
type
of
protocol
to
apply
at
that
time,
as
opposed
to
one
overarching
protocol.
Any
single
application
that
comes
in
gets
treated
the
same
way
that
certainly
wouldn't
be
I.
A
Don't
personally,
I,
don't
think
that's
fair,
because
not
every
application
is
the
same
properties.
The
same
I
mean
in
the
past.
I
know
that
my
award,
we
created
the
process
of
creating
five
acres
of
bobbling
habitat
for
some
development
or
liens.
So
sonic
developers
aren't
going
through
this
process.
They
are
finding
ways
to
who
have
worked
with
staff
and
to
protect
wildlife
through
construction,
and
this
I
think
this
will
just
help
guide
that
I.
A
You
know,
maybe
it's
not
as
strong
as
some
people
would
like,
but
it's
a
rare
it's
a
rare
occasion
where
we
develop
something
that
everyone
supports,
so
I
think
it's
you
trying
to
find
a
common
middle
ground
where
you
know,
people
think
that
we're
in
the
right
direction
and
first
thing
I-
think
this
achieves
that.
But
I'm
gonna
do
appreciate
you
taking
the
time
like
to
come
here
today.
A
A
F
A
A
This
motion
is
regarding
ground
mount
solar,
fit
projects
at
27:30
done,
Robin
Road,
1705,
old
Prescott,
Road,
23:42,
John,
Quinn,
Road,
23:52,
John,
Quinn,
road
and
7151
leaks
Road,
it's
just
essentially
each
motions
is
the
same
as
the
one
before
it.
It's
a
process
through
the
fit
rules
where
applications
whose
project
received
the
form
of
support.
Little
news
about
ease
over
here
awarded
priority
points
which
may
result
in
the
applicants
being
offered
a
fit
contract
prior
to
other
persons
applying
for
fit
contracts.
A
I
Just
yeah,
just
as
a
point
of
clarification,
did
I
hear
you
say:
1705
old
Prescott
Road
get
around
it.
It
was
an
incorrect
incorrectly
added
on
one
of
the
earlier
motions.
It's
a
different
site.
Actually,
the
proper
address
is
identified
by
in
number
rather
than
an
address.
Just
don't
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
proving
something
for
1705.
It.
A
Was
the
motion
I
haven't
Bernice,
to
send
you
if
I
see
one
saw
just
all
right,
so
first
I
just
had
the
that
the
rules
procedure
be
waived
to
consider
the
following
motion
to
allow
for
applicants
to
proceed
under
the
feed-in
tariff
program
and
solar
hit
projects
that
carried
and
then
to
consider
the
motion
so
yeah.
So
you
have
to
change
that
then,
and
we
have
the
pin
number.
Hopefully,
finem
was
right
for
three
one:
nine,
oh
nine,
nine
for
but
the
address
you
can
address
that
afterwards.
F
A
At
Ocean,
Road
fairs
committee
recommend
council
approved
the
individual
motions
of
support
for
the
ground,
manses
solar,
fit
program,
project
applications
listed
as
dependences
a
through
E,
of
course,
the
ones
that
I
just
already
mentioned.
So
again,
it's
moved
by
Councillor
to
ruse
on
on
the
on
the
inter
okay.
Thank
you.
So
we
want
to.
We
haven't
notice,
emotion,
but
that's
we'll
do
that
later.
We
want
to
open
mic
session.
A
H
H
Hours
ago,
a
gateway
at
manitech,
Main
and
Bank
field
at
this
present
time,
the
property
adjacent
to
that
intersection
is
for
sale.
When
we
look
at
the
transportation
master
plan,
we
see
a
concept
of
protecting
rights,
of
wait
either
for
rail
or
for
transit
or
furloughs.
We
don't
seem
to
have
a
protection
for
elements
such
as
a
gateway
feature
when
the
property
comes
up
for
sale
to
have
the
city
protect
that
particular
piece
of
land
for
the
use
of
the
designation
in
the
trap.
H
Second
secondary
plan,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
that
we
look
at
finding
ways
to
provide
provisions
for
protection
of
those
kinds
of
elements
going
forward
as
opposed
to
allowing
them
to
be
sold
and
then
not
be
available
for
that
use.
So
that's
that's
the
first
item.
The
second
item
has
to
do
with
development
charges
and
growth
right
now,
development
charges
are
collected,
citywide,
but
they're
applied
to
growth
areas
which
are
predominantly
hidden
the
urban
area.
H
So
when
it
comes
to
infrastructure
projects
such
as
intersection,
that
has
been
approved
through
an
EA
and
the
intersection
improvement
project
at
the
corner
of
Bank
field
and
Prince
of
Wales,
there
is
no
funding
mechanism
available
to
actually
fund
that
project.
There's
not
sufficient
money
and
the
intersection
improved
budget
to
even
consider
such
an
improvement.
I
would
like
to
see
an
opportunity
to
have
a
revenue
stream
applied
to
the
rural
areas
which
tax
taps
into
the
development
funds
as
well.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
obviously
I.
Don't
think
I
have
personal
information
on
that.
The
second
part
we
can
try
to
work
with
staff,
I'll
try
to
get
some
more
information
and
then
I
can
actually
share
it
with
you
on
those
I
know
that
some
from
the
first
one
you
know
as
a
policy
until
we
until
we
actually
have
a
plan
as
to
how
we're
developing
an
intersection.
Let's
say
we
don't
acquire
lands
until
that
intersection
improvement
is,
is
approved,
so
I'm,
not
sure.
A
What's,
mechanism
city
would
have
to
essentially
stockpile,
and
but
it
is
an
issue
dairyman,
because
it's
interesting
discussion
because
I
know
last
month,
at
this
very
meeting
we
talked
about
you
know
in
the
cherish
master
plan,
arrows
general
arrows
that
go
through
nowhere.
What
what
are
those
arrows
mean?
What
are
we
doing?
Are
we
protecting
that
land?
Because
we
really
aren't
so
it's
it's
initiative
on
set
forth
I'm
happy
to
try
to
take
your
comments
here
and
work
with
staff
and
see
if
I
get
some
comments
back
to
you.
A
So
thank
you
for
coming,
so
we
have
a
typical
mic
session
notice.
The
motion
would
you
ever
notice?
The
motion
from
Kol
Shan
teary-
you
can't
be
here
today,
he's
at
a
police
conference
on
behalf
of
the
City
of
Ottawa,
so
this
notice
will
be
moved
by
Councillor
de
Roos
in
his
in
his
absence
and
will
be
dealt
with
at
the
next
at
the
next
committee
meeting.
It
does
deal
also
with
development
charges.
I'll
just
read
the
the
barn
really
quick.
It's
just
that
therefore
be
resolved.
A
The
air
act
recommends
councillor,
grant
the
authority
to
the
city,
clerk
and
solicitor
to
answer
and
agree
with
the
owner
of
3765
loggers
waiver,
develop
charges
associated
with
the
chart,
a
change
in
use
of
the
existing
structure
for
a
period
of
two
years
from
the
issuance
of
any
building
permit.
This
is
a
this:
is
a
school
and
fits
in
Kinberg.
That's
the
use
is
being
changed
and
the
property
owner
is
being
charged
essentially
retroactively.
Development
charges
and
I
know
counselor
I'll
shed
tears
been
working
with
the
property
owner
to
try
to
resolve
the
issue.