►
From YouTube: Ottawa City Council
Description
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas
A
This
is
a
public
meeting
to
consider
the
proposed
couple
hands
of
official
plan
and
zoning
bylaw
amendment
listed
item
2
to
item
10
on
today's
agenda
for
the
items
just
mentioned,
only
those
who
make
oral
submission
today
or
written
submission
before
the
amendments
are
adopted
by
preet,
the
matter
to
the
local
planning,
Appeal
Tribunal.
In
addition,
the
applicant
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
local
planning
Appeal
Tribunal.
A
If
counsel,
does
not
adopt
the
amendment
within
90
days
of
receipt
of
this
application
for
zoning
and
120
days
for
an
official
plan
amendment,
a
comment
sheet
is
available
at
the
door
for
anyone
wish
to
submit
a
written
comment
on
these
amendment
and
if
anyone,
if
anyone
who
has
not
registered
yet
would
like
to
speak
on
any
of
the
items,
please
pick
up
a
form
at
the
door
and
submitted
to
our
clerk
staff
on
the
right.
With
that
we'll
go
on
a
consent
agenda
first
and.
A
A
A
Okay,
now
bear
with
me.
There's
many
items
are
the
same,
but
I've
read
them
just
for
the
record
item:
3
zoning
bylaw
amendment
2,
0,
0,
Gold,
Line,
Road,
that
the
agricultural
affair
committee
recommend
council
approve
an
amendment
to
zoning
bylaw
2
2,
0,
0,
8,
2,
5,
0,
4,
part
of
200
gold
golden
lion,
Road
for
the
rezoning,
the
land
from
rural
countryside
zone.
A
Are
you
agricultural
zone
rural
exception
AG,
so
that
the
entire
parcel
will
be
consistently
Zone
in
line
with
the
Official
Plan
designation
and
the
part
of
two
hundred
golden
lion
Road
for
the
purpose
of
rezoning
the
land
from
rural
countryside
zone?
Are
you
agriculture,
sub-zone
for
Ag
for
to
prohibit
residential
use?
I'm
a
retaining
farmland,
as
detailed
in
document
to
item
number
two,
that
the
agricultural
fair
committee
approved
the
consultation
detail
section
of
this
report
on
the
item?
Okay,
thank
you.
A
Item
number
four:
is
zoning
bylaw
amendment
anomaly,
part
of
three
seven:
six:
zero
Granger
row,
a
Granger
Park
Road
item
number,
one
that
the
Agriculture
and
Rural
Affairs
Committee
recommend
console
approve
an
amendment
to
a
zoning
bylaw
to
0
0
8,
2,
5
0
for
the
purpose
of
rezoning,
the
entirety
of
trees,
3760
Clint,
Granger,
Park,
Row,
2
rural
countryside,
rural
exemption,
3
5
3.
Are
you
and
3/5
tree
argued
to
correct
an
error
as
detailed
in
document
2
and
that
the
Agriculture
and
Rural
Affairs
Committee
approved
the
consultation
details?
A
Item
number
5:
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
part
of
85
9-0
Marvel,
build
Road
the
agriculture
rural
Africa
media
document,
Council
approved
an
amendment
to
zoning
bylaw
2
0
0,
8,
2,
5,
0,
4,
part
of
85
9-0
Marvel
Road
for
the
purpose
of
the
rezoning,
a
portion
of
the
land
from
agriculture,
subs
own
to
AG
2
to
agriculture,
subs
own
686
to
prohibit
residential
use
on
the
retain
farm
land
as
detailed
in
document.
I.
A
A
A
Zoning
bylaw
amendment
part
of
377
yokes
Corner
Road
item
number,
one
that
agriculture,
that
agriculture
roar
affair
committee
recommend
council
approve
an
amendment
to
zoning
bylaw
2008,
two:
five:
zero:
four
part
of
three:
seven:
seven:
nine
york's
corner
for
purpose
of
reason
and
portion
of
the
land
from
agriculture,
subs
own
to
AG,
to
agriculture,
sub-zone
686,
to
prohibit
residential
uses
on
the
retaining
farmland.
As
detailed
in
document
to
item
number.
Two,
the
agricultural
fair
committee
approved
the
consultation
detail
section
of
this
report.
A
On
the
item-
item
number
eight
zoning
bylaw
amendment
part
of
3464
96,
first
line
road
that
the
agriculture
rural
affair
committee
recommend
consul,
approve
an
amendment
to
zoning
bylaw
2008,
two
five:
zero
four
part
of
6496;
first
line
road
for
the
purpose
of
rezoning,
the
land
from
agricultural
zone;
sub-zone
282
to
agriculture,
sub-zone
686
to
prohibit
residential
uses
on
the
retain
and
farm
land
as
detailed
in
document
2,
and
that
Agriculture
and
Rural
Affairs
Committee
approved
consultation.
Details
section
of
this
report
to
be
included
as
part
of
the
previous
planation.
On
the
item
of
k.
A
Scott
were
done.
Item
number
nine
zoning
bylaw
amendment
48:37
albion,
road
item
number,
one:
the
agriculture
of
rural
affair
committee
recommend
consul,
approve
an
amendment
to
zoning
bylaw
2008
2,
5,
0,
4,
48:37,
Albion,
Road,
hard
dropped,
Ottawa,
Raceway
and
Casino
to
amend
exception,
5,
8,
r
and
schedule
s38
1,
as
detailed
in
document
4
&
5,
unable
a
revised
layout
at
the
expanded
casino
by
a
permitting
a
new
location
for
the
proposed
hotel,
be
permitting
outdoor
commercial
patio.
Minimum
6
metres
wide.
A
The
drive,
soil
and
and
front
yard
parking
with
a
minimum
of
3
meter
landscape
strip,
see
clarifying
the
end
of
the
previous
bylaw
by
removing
text
and
D.
Revising
the
holding
provisions
and
item
number
2
is
that
the
agricultural
affairs
committee
approved
the
consultation
details
section
of
this
report
before
I
believe
we
have
a
speaker
in
support.
But
before
we
go
to
the
speaker,
go
to
my
colleague,
councillor
of
gurus,
who
has
a
motion
to
move,
and
this
item
comes
loose.
B
Thank
You
mr.
chair
I
have
a
motion
friendly
motion
actually
with
I,
already
discussed
it
with
the
chair
and
councillor
Dean's
and
fee
and,
of
course,
our
TMP
team,
and
that's
just
odd
clarification
that
will
not
put
Earl
Armstrong
to
jump
the
queue.
It's
just
in
consideration
for
our
massive
transportation
team
for
next
TMP,
it
reads
were:
is
supporting
the
hard
drug
development
at
48-37.
Albion
Road
is
action
of
2019
2020
term
of
council
priority
and
whereas
the
Hard,
Rock,
ROA,
Raceway
and
casino
expansion
at
48-37,
Albion
Road,
is
located
adjacent
to
the
future.
B
Extension
of
Armstrong
road
from
Albion
wrote
to
hearten
road
as
identified
in
the
transportation
master
plans,
road
network
concept,
whereas
the
environment
assessment
for
or
from
extension,
was
completed
in
2019
to
protect
the
corridor
for
future
road
extension
and
respond
effectively
to
the
development
application
at
48:37.
Albion
Road,
whereas
the
implementation
of
Earl
Armstrong
extension
is
identify
as
a
part
of
the
TMP,
affordable
road
network
in
two
2031
and
correspondingly
has
no
funding
allocated
in
the
city.
B
Long
range
financial
plan
and
whereas
road
project
outside
the
city
longer
range
financial
plan
are
not
eligible
for
development
charges,
funding
or
front
ending
agreement
therefore
be
resolved.
That
Agriculture
and
Rural
Affairs
community
committee
recommend
that
council
direct
staff
and
transportation
services
to
review
the
implementation
timing
for
our
Armstrong
extension
from
Albion
road
to
Bank
Street
and
look
for
ways
to
advance
the
segment
as
part
of
the
ongoing
transportation,
Master
Plan
Update
Thank
You
mr.
chair
Thank,.
C
A
A
Item
item
number
10,
Fluellen
special
study
area
and
google
and
wetland
official
plan
amendment
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
that
the
Agriculture
and
Rural
Affairs
Committee
item
the
one
recommend
that
council
approved
the
proposed
official
plan
amendment
to
remove
policy
three
to
five
Fluellen
special
study
area
to
remove
the
flu
on
a
special
study
area
overlay
from
Schedule
A
of
the
plan
and
to
change
the
designated
significant
wetland
boundaries
of
güven
wetland,
complex
on
schedule,
a
and
B
of
the
plan.
As
shown
in
document.
A
One
obviously
recommending
that
council
approved
the
proposed
zoning
bylaw
amendment
to
change
the
zone
and
to
reflect
the
revisions
of
the
designated
boundaries
of
the
google
and
wetland
complex,
as
shown
in
document
two.
So
we
do
have
a
presentation
from
staff
and
we
have
numbers
speaker
on
this
item.
And
if
anyone
wish
to
speak
about
this
item,
please
you
can
sign
up
with
the
clerk.
So
we'll
hold
item
number
ten
item:
11
dylan
walls
and
johnston
municipal
drain
appointment
of
engineer
that
the
Agriculture
and
Rural
Affairs
Committee
recommend
that
council
appoint
mr.
A
Andy
Robinson
PN
Robinson
consultant
Inc.
As
an
engineer
of
record
to
prepare
a
report
under
Section
78,
one
of
the
drainage
have
to
inform
council
on
the
current
status
of
the
Dylan
Wallace
municipal
drain
and
the
Johnston
municipal
drain
and
where
one
or
more
of
the
project
listed
under
section,
78
1.1,
as
required
for
the
better
use,
maintenance
or
repair
of
the
drainage
works
or
delay
or
or
lands
or
roads
on
the
item.
11.
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
and
we
do
have
information.
A
D
D
I'd
to
my
far
right
is
Geraldine
Wildmon,
who
leads
our.
E
D
Thank
You
mr.
fur
wire
members
of
committee.
The
provincial
policy
statement
requires
municipalities
to
protect
provincially
significant
wetlands
from
development.
The
province
identifies
provincially
significant
wetlands
based
on
wetland
evaluations.
Most
wetland
evaluations
are
related
to
planning
and
development
applications.
D
We
protect
these
PSWs
as
they're
known
by
designating
them
as
significant
wetlands
in
our
official
plan
and
showing
them
on
the
schedules
of
the
plan.
The
Goulburn
wetland
complex
is
a
provincial
II,
significant
complex
that
lies
west
of
Statesville.
The
word
complex
means
that
it
consists
of
a
number
of
non
contiguous
wetland
areas
which
nonetheless
are
connected
or
otherwise
are
functionally
linked.
It
was
first
evaluated
by
the
province
in
the
1990s.
D
Its
boundaries
have
been
re-evaluated
several
times
since,
most
recently
as
part
of
the
wellin
special
study
area
process,
every
reevaluation
has
identified
more
wetland
area.
The
Fluellen
special
study
area
policy
was
put
in
place
to
resolve
concerns
raised
by
landowners
in
the
2005-2006
revaluation
of
the
wetland
complex,
which
added
20
new
wetland
areas
to
that
complex.
The
landowners
believed
that
the
wetlands
were
not
natural
but
a
result
of
factors
such
as
the
widening
of
highway
7
quarry
pumping
and
inadequate,
ditch
and
drain
maintenance.
D
The
Welland
special
study
area
policy
put
in
a
four
step
process
for
answering
these
questions
and
resolving
the
issues
it
required.
A
mineral
aggregate
review
be
completed
for
the
whole
city,
which
was
a
process
ongoing
at
the
time
it
required
a
cumulative
effects.
Study
of
drainage
changes
in
the
area.
It
required
a
re-evaluation
of
the
wetland
boundaries
using
the
Ontario
wetland
evaluation
system,
and
then
it
required
the
Official
Plan
amendment
and
zoning
bylaw
amendment,
which
is
before
you
right
now.
D
D
So
this
amendment
will
do
three
things.
First,
it
will
remove
the
Fluellen
special
study
overlay
from
Schedule
A
of
the
Official
Plan.
This
is
the
rural
land-use
schedule
and
The
Associated
Official
Plan
policies
in
Section.
Three
point
two
point:
five
of
the
Official
Plan:
it
will
designate
the
expanded
boundaries
of
the
provincially
significant
wetland
as
significant
wetland
on
Schedule
A
of
the
Official
Plan,
and
it
will
amend
the
zoning
bylaw
to
reflect
the
new
designations.
D
I
want
to
focus
on
four
points
in
this
presentation.
First,
that
the
Fluellen
special
study
area
policy
sets
out
the
agreed
process
and
requirements
for
resolution
of
the
land-use
issues
in
this
area.
Second,
I
want
to
describe
how
the
city
has
implemented
this
policy.
Third
I
want
to
illustrate
the
conclusion
that
the
wetlands
are
naturally
occurring
and
fourth
I
hope
to
show
that
adoption
of
the
OPA
and
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
is
the
best
and
most
expeditious
way
for
us
to
move
forward.
D
D
The
point
here
is
that
the
flue
oil
and
special
steady
area
policy
established
a
process
for
bringing
planning
and
land-use
decisions
back
into
conformity
with
the
provincial
policy
statement
and
the
Official
Plan.
It
was
approved
by
council
by
the
province
and
by
the
Ontario
Municipal
Board.
It's
a
process
that
we
followed
and
that
we
have
completed.
D
The
policy,
as
I
mentioned
before,
set
out
first
requirements,
have
four
requirements.
First,
we
had
to
complete
the
Rural
review,
Mineral
Resources
study,
which
was
underway
at
the
time
to
determine
if
additional
aggregate
resources
should
be
designated
in
the
area,
robin
vandal
and
one
of
the
planners
with
the
city.
One
of
my
colleagues
conducted
that
study
and
the
conclusion
was
no.
The
city
already
had
an
adequate
supply
of
aggregate
designated.
D
We
had
to
complete
a
cumulative
effects
study
to
determine
if
things
like
highway,
widening
quarry
pumping
pumping
or
some
other
human
factor
was
responsible
for
the
wetlands.
In
the
area
we
completed
that
study,
which
concluded
that
the
wetlands
in
the
area
are
naturally
occurring.
We
had
to
reevaluate
the
boundaries
of
the
wetland
in
2016
the
year.
D
2016
was
significant
because
it
was
intended
to
allow
legal
drainage
work
undertaken
in
2011
to
have
an
impact,
if
indeed
it
was
going
to
have
an
impact,
and
we
had
to
bring
forward
this
OPA
and
zoning
bylaw
amendment
to
establish
the
appropriate
land
uses.
So
we
have
a
fulfilled
the
requirements
of
this
policy.
D
D
D
You
can
see
the
bed
of
highway
7,
you
can
even
see
quarries
and
subdivisions.
So
it's
very
high
resolution,
topographic
mapping
on
the
left
is
the
topography
without
any
lines
on
the
right
are
the
boundaries
of
the
provincially
significant
wetland
as
it
has
been
mapped.
What
you
can
see
is
that
these
wetland
areas
on
the
right
all
fall
within
these
basins
in
the
topography.
D
These
are
low
areas
where
water
naturally
accumulates.
So
these
are
the
places
where
we
would
expect
wetlands
normally
to
form,
although
it's
not
quite
as
clear,
the
the
mapping
also
shows
that
there
is
very
little
little
grade
across
the
area
from
north
to
south,
which
means
that
these
low-lying
basins
are
very,
very
difficult
to
drain.
Unless
I
said
those
are
the
conditions
under
which
you
would
expect
wetlands
to
form.
D
The
other
natural
factor
that
has
played
a
played
a
role
in
the
wetlands
in
this
air
formation
of
wetlands
is
the
return
of
beavers
to
the
landscape.
These
are
aerial
photographs
from
the
most
controversial
portion
of
the
Goulburn
wetland
complex,
the
so
called
diversion
between
flowing
Creek
and
the
Hobbs
drain
on
the
left
is
a
photograph
from
1976
on
the
right
is
a
photograph
from
1999,
so
you
can
see
in
1976.
D
The
wetlands
are
much
less
extensive
and
there's
very
limited
evidence
of
beavers.
If
you
look
down
at
this
area,
for
example,
you
can
see
that
that
appears
to
be
mainly
agricultural
land
or
recently
abandoned
agricultural
land
rather
than
wetland.
If
you
look
at
it
in
1999,
however,
you
will
see
that
it
is
now
covered
with
wetland.
D
The
difference
here
is
that
in
1976
there
were
very
few
beavers
on
the
landscape.
If
you
know
your
history,
beavers
were
basically
trapped
out
of
the
Ottawa
Valley
almost
250
years
ago,
however,
by
1999
they
had
recolonized
the
area,
and
you
can
see
their
evidence
in
the
photography
in
this
in
the
1999
photograph
at
the
very
top,
for
example
along
the
creek.
You
can
see
three
new
beaver
dams
and
resulting
beaver
ponds.
D
If
you
look
at
if
you
follow
the
line
of
flowing
Creek,
which
is
a
bit
difficult
to
see,
but
it
comes
down
here
and
flows
along
this
area.
Here,
you
can
see
that
there's
a
whole
chain
of
beaver
ponds
and
beaver
dams
in
here.
This
wetland
area
in
the
center
is
bounded
by
a
very,
very
large
Beaver
Dam,
so
recolonization
of
the
area
by
beavers
helped
to
reestablish
wetlands
that
would
have
been
present
on
the
pre
settlement
landscape
prior
to
the
trapping
out
of
beavers.
D
This
is
a
natural
process
should
also
note
that
in
1999,
when
wetlands
we're
at
their
maximum
across
the
area,
highway
7
had
not
yet
been
widened
and
the
big
quarrys,
the
big
Cavanaugh
and
Tomlinson
quarry's
had
not
yet
been
started.
So
this
is
this.
Water
is
not
as
a
result
of
the
widening
highway
7
or
pumping
from
those
quarries.
D
The
one
human
factor
that's
been
important
in
the
area
is
agriculture,
because
farming
can
change
conditions.
Some
of
the
wetlands
in
the
area
are
very
marginal.
If
you
clear
the
vegetation
the
soil
warms
up
earlier
in
the
year,
the
soil
gets
hotter.
The
land
dries
out
more
quickly
and
you're
less
likely
to
have
the
formation
of
wetlands
so
we're
looking
here
at
an
area
that
is
south
of
Fluellen,
Road
and
west
of
konley
along
the
Hobbs
dream.
D
D
D
It's
just
like
me:
it
takes
a
little
pause
now,
so
in
1999,
however,
these
lands
had
been
abandoned
as
agriculture
they
no
long
being
farmed.
The
vegetation
had
grown
back
up
and,
as
a
result,
you
see
the
difference
in
color
between
this
area
here
and
this
area
up
here.
These
areas
have
become
much
much
wetter
and,
in
fact,
now
qualify
as
wetland
2014.
D
The
other
point
I
want
to
make
here
is
that
the
clearing
of
this
land,
again,
the
and
putting
it
back
into
all
agricultural
production,
is
allowed
under
the
wetland
policies.
Wetland
policies
say
that
existing
agricultural
uses
can
continue,
and
since
this
land
was
in
production
previously
and
has
just
been
restored,
we
consider
that
to
be
existing
agricultural
use,
and
so
it
is
permitted
under
the
policies.
D
So
this
official
plan
amendment
and
zoning
bylaw
amendment
is
important
for
Geddes
getting
us
out
of
our
current
planning
and
regulatory
limbo.
Currently
we
have
areas
designated
as
rural
or
other
land
use
in
Schedule
A
of
the
Official
Plan,
but
which
are
in
fact
identified
as
provincially
significant
wetland
by
the
province.
D
This
is
a
situation
that
leads
to
confusion.
Someone,
for
example,
might
purchase
a
property
designated
general
rural
thinking
that
they
can
develop
it
or
sever
it,
and
yet,
when
they
come
in
to
the
city
for
an
application,
we
advise
them
that
it
is
provincially
significant
wetland
and
in
fact
they
can't
do
so.
If
counsel
in
the
future
were
to
vote
to
expand
the
urban
boundary.
D
One
of
the
things
we're
looking
at
in
the
Official
Plan
review
again,
the
current
situation
creates
confusion
and
uncertainty
about
which
lands
might
qualify
for
inclusion
in
the
urban
boundary
in
which
lands
might
not.
We
could
have
a
property
that
has
no
significant
wetland
designation
on
it,
but
which
in
fact
has
provincially
significant
wetland
and
so
staff
would
have
to
recommend
against
including
it.
This
is
a
confusion.
We
probably
don't
need
in
a
process
that
is
already
likely
to
be
very
complicated.
D
We
have
some
provincially
significant
wetlands
that
are
regulated
and
some
that
are
not
sometimes
within
the
same
jurisdiction
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
same
conservation
authority.
So
the
Rideau
Valley
Conservation
Authority,
for
example,
only
regulates
provincially,
significant
wetlands
that
are
designated
in
our
official
plan
that
leaves
non
designated
wetlands
parenthese
significant
wetlands
open
to
drainage,
so
the
simplest
and
quickest
way
to
resolve
these
problems
is
to
approve
the
recommendation
for
the
Official
Plan
amendment
and
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
and
return
to
our
normal
planning
processes.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr.
Stowell
and
mr.
her
wire,
my
colleague,
Scott
Moffat,
have
a
motion
to
move
so
for
this
the
benefit
of
the
speaker.
I
have
a
benefit
of
the
speaker.
They
can
speak
on
both
the
report
and
demotion
from
councillor
Moffat,
so
we'll
go
to
councillor
Moffat,
to
introduce
more.
C
C
Just
to
introduce
it
if
people
some
people
in
this
room
will
recall
this
dates
back
to
2005
as
a
result
of
a
developing
application
along
Llewellyn
road
and
a
need
for
environmental
impact
statements
that
environmental
impacts
to
even
turn
into
the
Goulburn
wetland,
complexing
and
fast
forward
of
2009
and
an
OMB
decision
to
review
wetlands
in
the
area
spread
further
review
and
to
provide
landowners
opportunity
to
address
that
there
was
the
Fluellen
special
study
area
that
was
greedy
and
special
study
area
had
specific
boundary.
So
between
2009
2016
there
was
some
activities
in
the
area.
C
One
was,
unfortunately,
a
failed
drainage
application,
but
also
opportunities
by
landowners
to
make
changes
to
the
property
to
see
if
they
could
improve
drainage
in
the
property
and
then
to
come
back
and
reevaluate.
So
when
tenders
were
given
opportunity,
2016
dillon
consulting
was
brought
in
to
update
the
mapping
to
go
back
and
review
the
mapping
with
the
changes
and
some
changes
were
identified
in
the
flow
and
special
study
area
outlined
map
outline.
C
However,
dillon
consulting
went
far
beyond
the
limits
of
that
Fluellen
special
study
area
and
I
understand
why
they
did
it,
but
from
a
land
perspective
from
a
2009
OMB
decision
perspective,
this
was
not
consistent
with
what
residents
had
anticipated
so
reaching
as
far
north
as
West
Carlton
north
of
highway
7
was
not
what
was
expected
so
what
I'd
like
to
do
here
today?
You
know
I'll
read
the
motion
in
a
second,
but
it's
it's
to
bring
us
back
to
where
we
anticipated.
C
We
were
in
the
first
place,
which
is
the
2009
fluent
special
study
area
boundaries
and
to
limit
their
rezoning
to
only
within
that
that
designated
area.
It's
still
impactful,
there's
no
question.
I
know:
I
have
residents
in
that
area
that
are
still
gonna
be
impacted
by
this.
It
doesn't
actually
address
their
concerns,
but
it
brings
us
back
to
a
point
where
I
feel
comfortable
that
were
we're
being
consistent
with
what
we
said
over
ten
years
ago
before
my
time.
C
C
They
are
on
the
screen,
so
you
can
see
many
in
this
room
will
be
familiar
with
that
outline.
That's
the
that's
the
outline
that
we
all
we
all
have.
We
all
dealt
with
back
in
the
last
decade.
I
actually
has
two
decades
ago,
so
this
has
been
a
long
process
as
as
mr.
Stowell
mentioned,
so
I'm
just
trying
to
provide
some
some
continuity
to
what
we
had
originally
and
and
that's
where
that's
the
intent
of
this
motion.
So
thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
Thank
You,
Carson
Moffatt,
for
your
motion.
Now
we
go
to
a
public
delegation
and
then
question
to
staff
and
and
then
we'll
come
back
to
the
motion.
But
we
start
first
with
delegation
Robin
:.
A
F
Good
morning
and
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
speak
today,
my
name
is
Robin
tilgner
and
I
am
the
joint
owner
with
my
husband,
mo
of
just
under
100
acres,
extending
from
Fluellen
Road
on
the
North
to
fallow
field
road
on
the
south.
My
husband's
family
came
here
as
sponsored
refugees
from
post-war
Europe
in
the
1950s
through
hard
work.
They
built
up
a
productive
dairy
farm
which
sustained
the
family
and
my
mother-in-law
until
her
death.
Several
years
ago,
the
land
we
owned
as
the
remaining
portion
of
that
farm.
F
My
husband's
focus
on
maintaining
a
career
as
a
professional
engineer
and
also
in
maintaining
arable
land,
led
us
to
choose
the
rehabilitation
of
the
property
under
the
direction
of
the
Ministry
of
Natural
Resources,
some
60,000
pine
trees
were
planted
as
well
as
undertaking
the
ongoing
restoration
of
the
deciduous
tree
canopy.
We
chose
to
leave
open
hay
producing
meadows,
which
have
provided
ample
absorbency
for
rain
runoff.
F
As
a
consequence,
we
provide
habitat
for
an
increasing
variety
of
wildlife
species
and
we
do
not
allow
hunting
the
only
visible
standing
water
is
a
small
pond,
dug
at
the
suggestion
of
the
MNR
and
our
insurance
providers
for
fire
protection.
We
were
notified
initially
by
letter
that
rezoning
changes
were
happening
and
when
the
first
16
are
so
acres
along
the
front
of
our
property
were
marked
as
possible
wetland.
We
did
not
protest
that
seemed
a
reasonable
buffer
against
an
increasing
amount
of
water
to
the
north.
F
Since
then
largely
silence,
we
get
a
tax
fill
every
year,
but
certainly
have
had
no
other
regular
communication
from
the
city
concerning
our
property.
Since
2016,
we
attended
relevant
meetings
thanks
to
notification
from
our
neighbors,
with
the
small
and
imprecise
Maps
available
to
us,
we
can
now
see
that
there
seems
to
be
an
almost
50%
increase
of
proposed
wetland
from
the
original
plan.
Much
of
that
is
a
gravel
ridge
which
winds
its
way
through
the
whole
property
and
includes
our
house
septic
system,
driveway,
hydro
lines
and
thousands
of
trees.
F
Those
carefully
chosen
by
the
MN
are
as
suitable
planting
on
a
gravel
bed.
We
are
classed
as
an
agricultural
operation.
What
happens
now,
I
wonder
how
the
city
expects
us
to
continue.
I
have
to
tell
you
that
I'm
very
frightened
about
our
future.
We
can
get
no
answers.
How
are
we
meant
to
operate
and
harvest
cut
our
own
wood?
Look
after
the
wood
Lots,
properly
replace
harvested
trees,
add
a
needed
machine
shop.
All
the
while,
knowing
our
estate
planning
has
been
decimated.
F
Can
any
of
you
imagine
a
rezoning
to
your
home
that
resulted
in
a
2/3
drop
in
its
value
without
any
compensation.
We
are
conservationists,
striving
to
maintain
and
encourage
a
balanced
rural
ecosystem
and
broken-hearted
that
our
choices
seem
to
have
been
stripped
away,
not
once
as
our
counselor
or
his
staff
reached
out
to
us
to
see.
F
If
we
had
any
questions
or
if
we
needed
information,
no
one
from
Dylan
has
been
in
communication
with
us
since
2016
someone
just
extended
lines
on
a
map,
our
local
environmentalists
and
our
counselors
need
to
know
that
the
maps
across
which
they
write
wetlands
are
real
properties
owned
by
real
people.
People
who
had
hopes
for
the
future
people
who
loved
the
conservation
work.
They
were
doing
because
they
love
their
land.
I
am
one
of
those
people,
and
I
am
sitting
right
here
right
in
front
of
you
and
I
am
terrified.
F
This
year
marks
the
75th
anniversary
of
the
end
of
World
War.
Two,
my
husband's
family
was
given
refuge
in
Canada
when
they
fled
post-war
chaos
and
their
property
was
taken
from
them.
No
choices
were
left
to
them.
Our
family
of
five
children
and
10
grandchildren,
now
with
deep
roots
in
the
area,
are
watching
their
father
and
grandfather
appear
to
once
more
lose
his
freedom
of
choice,
the
use
of
and
enjoyment
of
his
home
and
his
life's
work.
F
All
because
someone
who
drew
lines
on
a
map
could
not
seem
to
clearly
differentiate
between
a
wetland
and
thousands
of
trees
on
a
gravel
Ridge.
We
believe
this
to
be
a
matter
of
compensation
from
the
City
of
Ottawa
for
lost
property
value
due
to
a
change
in
zoning,
and
we
intend
to
pursue
that
course
of
action
in
closing.
I
will
stake
the
action
item
arising
from
these
comments.
We
are
requesting
that
a
boundary
review
of
the
wetland
parameters
for
the
east
half
lot
17
concession
8
be
undertaken
and
that
those
boundaries
be
reduced
in
size.
A
G
Yeah
I
wanted
to
the
delegate.
Thank
you.
Clarification
is
a
concern
about
being
able
to
continue
the
existing
agricultural
farming
uses
or
is
a
concern
about
future
real
estate
value.
If
you
ever
wanted
to
sell
the
property.
Well,
it's
not
withstanding.
Your
concerns
about
the
gravel
rating
is
separate.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that,
as
a
committee,
we
understand
your
particular
concern
about
the
future
of
your
property.
Well,.
F
F
We
hear
stories
about
taking
soil
away,
bringing
so
so
that
communication
is
is
lacking.
So
we
don't
know
where
to
go
for
answers
in
terms
of
certainly
all
of
us
in
terms
of
estate
planning
need
to
look
at
that
and
if
the
land
is
valued
at
a
certain
amount.
Previous
to
this
yeah,
where
that
is
always
a
colored
I'm
sure.
It's
a
concern
for
every
homeowner
that
this
is
an
issue
but
to
lose
the
ability
to
maintain
that
agricultural
operation
to
put
up
a
small
building
to
do
the
things
we
need
to
do.
F
That's
a
huge
concern
and-
and
we
honestly
do
not
know
where
to
go
for
consistent
information
because
again
we're
City
City
of
Ottawa
and
then
there's
provincial
regulations.
If
it's
a
provincial
wetland,
so
we
desperately
need
help
knowing
how
to
proceed
and
that
and
so
certainly
having
seeing
our
boundaries
of
the
wetland
increase
to
take.
In
lands
that
we
go
I
just
can't
see
it
as
a
wetland,
but
you
know
I
realize
there
are
four
different
designations
for
wetlands
by
definition.
But
okay.
G
Thank
you.
Can
I
mister
share
quickly
our
staff
would
city
staff
be
a
starting
point
if
residents
have
questions
like
I
appreciate
that,
do
they
go
to
the
city,
do
they
go
to
the
province,
so
they
go
to
Mississippi.
Valley?
Is
the
city
a
logical
starting
point?
Can
they
contact
dr.
Stowe,
for
example,
and
you
could
triage
those
requests,
the
appropriate
body
based
on
what
they're
asking
is
that
a
appropriate
route
for
residents
with
further
questions.
D
Absolutely
that
that
act,
that's
my
role
at
the
city
to
field
questions
like
that
to
refer
people
to
other
resources.
If,
if
I
don't
have
the
answers
for
them,
we
have
since
2016
maintained
a
web
page
with
the
outlining
the
process
and
the
implications
of
the
special
study
area
process
and
the
and
the
wetland
re-evaluation,
and
that
website
was
included
in
the
notice
that
we
we
sent
out
in
2016
to
try
and
and
make
sure
that
people
had
current
information
as
well.
Okay,
thank
you.
Yeah.
F
If
I,
if
I
might
comment,
I,
think
I
think
that
is
it's
a
difficult
situation
getting
getting
information
if
one
doesn't
belong
to
a
landowners
group
and
we
may
have
fallen
through
the
cracks
I
I
promise
you
that
the
letters
and
information
have
not
come
through
to
us
and
yes,
one
can
do
research,
but
it
there's
no
replacement
for
speaking
to
someone
who
really
knows
who
to
who
to
connect
with
it's.
The
the
free
flow
of
information
is
would
be
very
reassuring.
Okay,.
H
You
chair,
dr.
Stowe,
could
I
just
ask
a
question
before
I
understand
that
there
are
our
presenter
here
today
had
no
problem
with
the
boundaries
as
they
they
were
delineating
in
2016.
How
did
you
expand?
What
methodology
did
you
use
in
order
to
expand
those
boundaries?
Did
you
do
you
walk?
Did
you
go
around
and
see
the
properties
that
were
going
to
be
included
or
how
was
how?
How
did
you
decide
what
was
going
to
be
included
in
those
new
wetland
boundary.
D
Three
mr.
chair,
the
the
city
did
not
conduct
the
the
wetland
evaluation
itself.
We
hired
a
consultant
Dillon
consulting
to
do
the
wetland
evaluation
on
our
behalf
and
Dillon
submitted
those
results
directly
to
the
Ministry
of
Natural,
Resources
and
forestry,
for
their
review
and
confirmation
or
not.
So
it
was
not
the
city
that
was
conducting
the
the
wetland
evaluation.
It
was
a
consultant
on
our
behalf.
D
A
C
F
C
Right,
the
back
yes,
so
so
you
still
have
I
know
that
just
from
a
future
use.
Obviously
in
that
area
in
Goulburn,
Rogow
burned,
the
development
potential
is
limited.
As
is
you
do
have
a
right
to
severance.
It
would
appear
that
you
have
not
taken
that
rights
since
2003,
so
you'd
sell
the
right
to
to
senses,
which
it
looks
like
you
could
obtain
at
the
rear
of
your
property.
Okay
and
then
you
still
haven't
put
18
to
20
hectares
outside
of
any
sort
of
designated
boundary.
C
From
that
perspective,
you
could
still
build
outbuildings
I
mean
if
you
it'd,
be
off
of
the
it'd,
be
it
I,
wouldn't
say
a
considerable
distance
from
your
from
the
the
oak
buildings
that
you
already
have
at
the
back
of
the
product
toward
the
middle
of
the
property.
But
there
is
still
I
mean
it
can
probably
assist
more
and
I
know
our
planning
staff
would
be
able
to
assist
more
if
that
was
something
you're
interested
in
doing.
C
C
As
a
result
of
this,
you
still
have
that
over
half
of
your
land
that
is
outside
of
that
zone,
which
is
somewhat
of
a
benefit,
so
you
do
get
the
negative
impact
on
one,
and
but
there
is
still
some
land
that
you
have
that
could
be
used
for
that.
So
I'm
just
important
to
know,
and
we
could.
We
could
discuss
further
again
Nick
someone
in
our
planning
department,
so
Nick's
aunt,
Impala,
outside
of
our
playing
department,
that
we
have
the
implementers,
the
folks
that
would
review
review
applications.
F
C
C
F
F
The
other,
the
other
implication,
of
course,
is
and
I
and
I
haven't
seen
anything
about.
This
is
in
a
sense,
it's
privately
owned
land
we're
donating
it
because
it
can't
be
used
for
anything
else.
The
question
of
compensation
I
mean
I,
haven't
seen
that
anywhere
about
tax
reduction,
or
you
know
it's
very.
C
C
D
A
F
A
I
The
road
was
also
raised
to
stop
flooding
of
it.
That's
to
the
north
of
us
all
water,
through
this
huge
culvert,
was
being
dumped
onto
the
Crocker
property
without
their
consent
to
flowing
Creek
engineers
for
the
hub's
extension
identified,
flowing
Creek
is
obstructed
a
memo
from
rita
valley
in
the
mo
e
february,
5th
of
one
approved
application
for
Tomlinson
of
seven
thousand
seven
million
seven
hundred
seventy
six
thousand
liters
a
day
gone
McIver
asks
Bruce
Reed.
I
If
the
Jacque
River
could
handle
all
of
this
extra
water,
Bruce
Reed
said
it
could
handle
ten
of
those
quarries
with
no
flood
damage
at
the
Richmond
or
significance
earns
up
to
the
Shea
Road,
which
was
a
municipal
drain.
We
have
no
reliable
information
from
Shay
road
to
the
dewatering
quarry
Bruce
Reed
says
it
would
be
advisable
for
the
Ministry
of
the
Environment
to
require
the
applicant
to
provide
confirmation
from
the
drainage
superintendent
that
the
system
has
a
capacity
to
accept
the
additional
flows.
I
Also,
the
dewatering
applicant
is
obliged
in
common
law,
to
interfere
with
a
drainage
of
his
downstream
neighbors
lands
and
to
produce
signed
consent
forms
from
the
downstream
riparian
land
owners
to
confirm
that
they
have
no
objection
to
the
Augmented
flows
drain
Zach
drainage
improvements
might
be
needed
to
convey
the
Pumped
water
across
another
property
owners.
Land
Dibley
have
already
been
pumping
water
along
the
north
side
of
the
Goulburn
rail
trail
draining
into
flowing
Creek,
with
no
permit
they're
applying
for
one.
I
At
that
time,
Golder
associates
pumping
from
several
quarries
adds
to
excessive
runoff
other
developments
such
as
widening
of
highway
7,
will
exempt
exhibit
or
whatever
existing
flooding.
Problems
quote
nodes
surface
water
will
be
discharged
into
the
wetland
and
drained
into
the
Goulburn
Creek.
The
additional
water
should
expand.
The
wetland
increased
the
flow
in
the
creek
forest
cover
will
be
lost,
Don
McIver,
RVCA
water
flow
from
the
Cory's
17
liters,
a
second
to
152
litres,
a
second
water
level
link
likely
to
increase
as
well
from
0.5
to
1
meter
picture
of
water
flowing
over
to
transcript.
I
Oh
yeah
I
have
a
picture
of
the
water
flowing
over
the
trans-canada
trail
interviews
with
several
committed
community
members
who
Annie
Robinson
consultants,
water
flow
rate
at
Conley
and
Fluellen
Road.
The
original
drainage
to
Colony
Road
was
8
liters
a
second
with
the
illegal
diversion
from
flowing
Creek.
It
now
is
80
2.5
litres.
A
second
Quarry
pumping
accounts
for
16%
of
the
water
flow
pumped
discharged
from
quarries
in
the
area
does
contribute
to
the
persistent
base
flow
that
is
observed
along
Conley,
Road
and
Floyd.
I
Creek
restoration
of
original
drainage
patterns
will
reduce
both
peak
flows
and
base
low
along
Conley.
Road
I
had
a
petition
signed
by
20
landowners
to
get
the
flowing
Creek
municipal
drain
started
to
provide
an
outlet
for
all
this
water
dumped
there.
It
failed
due
to
runaway
costs.
I
was
an
active
member
of
the
Stitz
Ville
snowmobile
Association
for
about
30
years,
my
groomed
trails
for
17
of
those
years
from
my
home
and
saw
lots
of
drain
changes.
I
One
of
our
trails
ran
from
Dwyer
Hill
Road
along
the
north
side
of
the
rail
line
to
Abbott
Street,
a
real,
pretty
trail
winding
through
lush
bush
area.
Now
a
quarry
and
flooded
have
maps
and
of
the
trails
available
have
pictures
of
water
going
over
the
rail
bed.
I
do
not
agree
with
the
Dylan's
Community
cumulative
report.
I
I
Five
working
quarries
discharged
water
courses
that
ultimately
discharged
to
the
Jacque
Tomlinson
and
Dibley
Bell
discharged
two
provincially
significant
that
serves
as
headwaters
for
flowing
Creek.
Just
one
paragraph
left
because
of
quarry
water
discharge
deviation
from
some
parameters
was
quite
large,
indicating
that
concentrations
in
the
affluent
from
all
quarries
the
Hobbs
drained
the
flowing
Creek
can
be
extremely
variable.
Thank.
A
A
That
was
fun,
I
think
we
call
it
mental
health
now
because
we're
supposed
to
shut
off
our
system
during
the
night,
but
I
happen
to
have
it
open
so,
but
welcome
to
the
committee,
sir,
you
have
five
minutes
to
address
the
committee
and
I
believe
the
clerk
send
your
email
around.
Consider
you
sending
yourself
as
well
so
right,
okay,
go
ahead!
Put
your
five.
J
J
Complex
and
the
city
study
didn't
make
any
mention
of
any
wetland,
but
as
a
result
of
the
bump
up
request
for
myself
and
two
others,
the
city
had
to
do
a
wetland
evaluation
work
which
resulted
in
some
landowners
going
out
and
destroying
part
of
the
wetland
which
has
been
ongoing
destruction.
Since
then,
the
proposed
official
plan
amendments
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
I
generally
support
they've
been
a
very,
very
long
time
coming.
I
very
strongly
oppose
councillor
Moffitt's
suggestion
of
limiting
the
recognition
of
the
the
wetlands
to
just
the
Fluellen
special
study
area.
J
That
is
not
to
be
limited
to
a
certain
area
that
it's
it's
not
based
just
on
strictly
a
geographic
point
here,
Geographic
point
there:
it's
based
upon
ecological
parameters,
so
you
can't
just
have
it
limited
to
within
the
lines
of
the
few
Islands
special
study
area.
The
wetland
has
to
be
looked
at
as
a
whole.
J
Now
another
part
about
which
I
refer
to
in
my
email
that
I
sent
you
is
that
there's
a
number
of
unev
alleyway
dat
wetlands
indicated
both
the
city's
G
Ottawa
mapping
website
and
also
on
the
OEM
and
ahrefs
Natural
Heritage
Information
Center
mapping.
Now
I,
don't
know
where
there's
Dylan
consulting
looked
at
those
unev
al?
J
U
8
@
wetlands
when
they
did
their
evaluation
work
back
in
2016
or
not,
but
if
the
wetland
the
Goulburn
wetlands
complex,
if
it's
to
be
properly
and
fully
completely
evaluated
those
unev
al-
u
8
@
wetlands
should
also
be
looked
at
by
a
professional
wetland
evaluator.
So
I
indicate
the
question
in
my
email
that
if
Dylan
looked
at
those
and
decided
that
they
don't
qualify
to
be
added
to
the
wetland
complex,
then
fine.
J
Now
there
is
also
the
reference
in
the
city
staff
report
about
if
the
city
doesn't
adopt
these
amendments
that
there's
no
right
of
appeal.
I
I,
don't
understand
that
I
appealed
to
the
OMB
back
in
2010
when
the
city
didn't
move
forward
with
recognizing
the
wetlands
that
Ron
Houser
identified
back
in
2004.
There's.
J
A
So
we'll
take
that
question
to
staff
and
they
can
answer
that
when
we
start
questioning
stuff,
it's
not
your
right.
Okay,
thanks
any
question
to
the
delegate:
oh
thank
you
very
much
for
symmetry.
Our
next
speaker
is
Ursula
and
mr.
Nasrallah
madness.
Rolla.
Are
they
both
speaking?
Are
you
both
speaking
mr.
Nezzer
Lila?
So
each
one
will
have
five
minutes.
E
Mr.
chair
members
of
council,
thank
you
representing
the
Cavanaugh
family
of
companies
today
regarding
our
parcel
of
land
combined
over
a
hundred
and
80
hectares,
approximately
of
land
in
this
affected
bythis
after
will
and
special
study
area.
Our
concern
from
the
outset
of
this
entire
process
has
been
primarily
procedural.
E
We
appreciate
councillor
Moffitt's
motion
as
it's
consistent
with
what
our
expectation
has
been
since
entering
into
a
legal
settlement
with
the
City
of
Ottawa
to
release
our
appeal
locate
76,
to
allow
this
land
to
be
brought
in
under
the
estate
lot
moratorium
with
certain
expectations
of
wetland
pre
existing
on
the
site.
The
scope
creep
of
the
Fluellen
special
study
area
was
always
a
concern
of
ours
in
terms
of
how
the
public
consultation
was
conducted.
I
will
defer
to
to
my
friend
in
our
council
legal
counsel,
our
simoleons
for
the
further
detail.
E
E
You
know
the
Fluellen
special
study
area
as
identified
by
councillor
Moffitt
thank
you
was
ident
in
terms
of
its
scope
and
that
was
accepted
and
that
came
out
of
the
2011
Ontario
Municipal
Board
decision.
You
know.
Since
then
there
was
the
cumulative
effect
study
which
Cavanaugh
continues
to
dispute
defiant.
Conclusions
of
we
have
retained
experts
in
the
fields
and
those
studies
are
close
to
conclusion
that
we
will
be
bringing
forward
in
regards
to
that,
including
the
the
findings
that
this
is
flat.
Topography.
E
It's
not
nurse
emission,
but
there
that's
a
discussion
for
another
day
now
in
regards
to
the
the
Dylan
study.
Wetlands
are
open
files
and
that's
the
opinion
of
the
province,
so
new
information
may
be
brought
forward
to
them
in
terms
of
designation
and
what
the
appropriate
designation
is-
and
you
know
that's
a
separate
process
from
the
city
and
the
Official
Plan
amendments
and
the
zoning
bylaws
that
are
before
you
but
I
think
that's
an
important
fact
just
to
bring
forward
so
people
in
the
room.
E
A
K
Hello
I'm
one
of
the
landowners
that's
going
to
be
affected
by
this,
and
a
small
group
of
us
got
together
about
a
year
ago
to
actually
organize
our
own
expert
special
study
of
the
extent
of
the
wetland
between
fallow
field
Road.
In
Mansfield,
we
actually
enlisted
a
qualified
evaluator
who
submitted
a
report
earlier
this
fall
and
who
changed
the
wetland
boundaries
fairly
significantly
in
the
areas
that
she
looked
at
by
taking
pictures,
walking
the
property
and
taking
it
really
on
the
ground.
Look.
K
The
communication
around
this
whole
issue
has
been
really
awful.
I
want
to
support
what
what
was
said
by
Robin
in
an
earlier
conversation,
I'm
a
person
who
bought
a
10
acre
parcel
of
land
on
him
on
fallow
field
Road
22
years
ago,
I
recognized
myself
that
it
was
wetland
and
that
it
should
be
conserved
and
have
made
you
know,
have
kept
the
land
pristine,
basically
not
developed.
It
allowed
it
to
recover
from
the
ice
storm
damage
that
was
very
significant,
cleared.
Some
of
the
deadfall
and
left
it
to
to
recover.
K
K
K
Think
that
you
know
I
understand
the
need
for
the
city
to
be
active
in
in
putting
in
bylaws
and
this
and
that
I
do
think
there
needs
to
be
a
recognition
that
provincially.
This
is
a
changing
and
evolving
wetland,
and
it
would
be
helpful
if
there
was
some
process
put
in
place
for
continual
reevaluation
of
the
zoning.
K
It's
a
significant
wetland.
It's
an
area
of
interest
you
somehow
the
planning
process
is
going
to
have
to
encapsulate
a
component
of
change
and
have
some
kind
of
a
continual
evaluation
process
in
place.
In
order
to
protect
this
wetland
appropriately
and
to
allay
the
fears
of
the
landowners
in
terms
of
the
planning
process,
thank
you.
A
K
H
K
Very
hard
to
say
my
neighbor
is
making
significant
modifications
to
his
land
level
and
the
flow
in
the
area.
There
appears
to
be
no
regulations
in
place
to
stop
him
from
doing
this
and
I
believe
that
putting
in
you
know,
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
loads
of
topsoil
is
preventing
the
flow
from
his
place
unto
my
place
and
therefore
my
well
and
its
growth
is
drying
up.
But
you
know
these
are
the
kinds
of
significant
changes
that
take
place
and
that
aren't
really
part
of
this
at
all.
Thank.
K
C
Because
that's
really
the
process
here
we're
only
we're
kind
of
a
ludicrous
rubber-stamp
in
this
process.
It's
it's
actually
quite
frustrating
I
would
prefer
not
to
do
this
at
all
in
right.
To
be
perfectly
honest,
it's
this
is
oh,
this
is
a
matter
of
wetland.
Evaluations
were
done,
they
were
submitted
to
the
MNR,
the
MNR,
recognized
them
and
we're
supposed
to
follow
suit.
With
the
zoning
it's
much
like
when
a
landfill
gets
approved,
we
have
no
say
in
it,
but
we're
supposed
to
zone
it
in
the
end.
C
So,
if
I
had
my
way,
I
would
just
not
do
any
of
this
and
I
would
just
let
the
province.
If
you
want
a
zone
this,
then
you
zone
it.
You
have
full
right
to
do
it
so,
but
there
I
know
there
is
a
process
I'm
not
in
your
president,
I'll
ask
Nick
afterwards
but
yeah.
So
there
is
a
question:
I
have
for
Nick
afterwards
stemming
from
what
your?
What
your
comment
is,
but
I'll
do
it
at
the
end.
May.
K
K
The
fact
that
I
owned
my
land
for
22
years
and
I
never
had
any
contact
with
anybody.
Until
my
neighbor
came
to
me
and
asked
me
if
I
wanted
to
participate
in
a
fairly
expensive
and
significant
study,
which
we've
now
presented,
you
know
pro
bono
for
the
ministry.
You
know
it
was
thousands
of
dollars.
We,
as
land
holders
spent
to
actually
do
our
own
expert
evaluation,
so
the
the
issue
of
of
monetary,
whatever
is
one
that's
going
to
be
eventually
on
the
on
the
plate.
Yeah.
C
K
L
Morning,
mr.
chair
and
councillors,
I'll
be
brief.
I
just
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
about
process
and
I
did
hear
from
a
number
of
property
owners
that,
although
they
were
affected
by
the
designations,
that
they
didn't
receive
a
letter
so
I
I
don't
know
what
the
process
is.
I,
don't
know.
If
letters
were
sent
to
some
people
sent
to
not
sent
to
others.
L
I,
don't
know,
I
know,
there's
information
on
the
website,
but
that's
kind
of
if
you're
thinking
about
it,
maybe
you'll
go
and
visit
that
this
has
been
a
very
long
process
and
there
are
a
lot
of
people
that
just
don't
go
to
the
website
to
see.
What's
what's
going
on,
the
other
option,
I
know
is
to
sign
up
for
notifications
and
it's
that's
just
foreign
to
a
lot
of
people.
L
So
I
I
appreciate
the
efforts
that
are
taken
by
the
city
to
let
people
know,
but
I
guess
I'm,
just
saying
it's
not
enough
and
if
you
can
do
more,
that
would
be
very
helpful.
The
other
thing
I
appreciate
is
the
city
letting
the
car
land
owners
know
about
these
things,
because
we
do
have
an
email
list.
We
do
send
out
notifications
to
let
people
know
this
is
happening,
that
there
is
a
meeting
and
you
should
be
going
and
why
you
should
be
going.
L
L
Consultants
come
on
their
land
and
do
an
evaluation,
but
in
the
end,
with
the
maps
that
were
available,
they
couldn't
really
tell,
even
though
they
had
submitted
the
results
from
their
own
studies.
Whether
or
not
there
was
any
change.
I
know
of
at
least
one
landowner,
where
their
consultant
had
disputed
some
of
the
bail
of
some
of
the
wetland
designation
but
I
think
to
this
day,
they're
not
really
kick
clear,
whether
that's
in
or
that's
out
so
I'm,
not
sure
whether
or
not
some
improvements
can
be
made
to
that
as
well.
L
The
province
right
now,
I
know,
is
looking
at
the
drainage
act.
The
current
landowners
for
sure
will
be
communicating
with
the
province
to
see
if
changes
can
be
made.
There's
always
a
conflict
between
the
conservation
authorities,
Act
and
the
drainage
act,
and
they
don't
work
well
together.
There
has
to
be
some
way
where
those
two
can
work
well,
where
one
does
not
Trump
the
other.
We
have
heard
a
lot
of.
We
have
heard
people
talking
about
the
flooding
and
I
think
more.
L
A
L
A
B
B
Can
we
can
you
give
this
committee
a
little
bit
briefing
on
how
you
do
how
you
did
your
communication,
because
we
heard
from
multiple
presenters
that
the
information
was
not
well
presented
to
them
and
they
have
to
get
it
from
the
neighbors
or
from
other
sources,
and
moving
forward
will
be
probably,
this
committee
recommended
maybe
to
improve
those
communication
with
the
residents
specifically
that
they're
impacted
directly
with
this?
Do
you
have
a
mailing
list?
Can
you
just
brief
us
give
us
a
couple.
Take
us
through
the
process,
how
you
did
it?
If
you
don't
mind.
D
Yes,
counselor
I'd
be
pleased
to
we
have
been
doing
mail
drop,
using
mail
drops
and
and
registered
mail,
as
well
as
our
website,
to
try
and
communicate
with
with
landowners.
So,
for
example,
prior
to
the
2016
public
meeting,
where
we
presented
the
results
of
the
cumulative
effects
study
and
announced
that
we
were
moving
ahead
with
the
wetland
evaluation,
we
did
a
mail
drop
in
the
area
to
notify
landowners.
D
When
the
Ministry
of
Natural,
Resources
and
forestry
made
a
decision
on
the
the
boundaries
of
the
wetland,
we
did
a
another
mail
drop
when
the
notices,
so
that
was
that
was
2016
and
then
in
2018,
when
we
actually
initiated
the
Official
Plan
amendment
and
zoning
bylaw
amendment,
we
sent
out
letters
to
landowners
within
the
area
that
was
to
be
affected.
If
I
recall
those
were
registered,
registered
letters
and
we
have
so
we've-
we've
been
as
proactive
as
we
can
be
in
trying
to
reach
landowners.
D
B
B
G
Mr.
chair
I
I've
been
looking
forward
to
this
report
coming
to
committee
and
council
for
a
while
I
started.
Looking
into
this
as
a
journalist
back
in
2014
and
I've
met
with
mr.
Wesley
I've
met
with
mr.
McCrae,
a
number
of
the
other
landowners
and
I've
attended
a
few
of
dr.
Stowe's
presentations
and
I
think
Goulburn
wetland
complex
that
word
complex
is
probably
a
good
way
to
explain
this
process
over
the
last
15
years.
G
I
had
a
few
questions
because
I've
had
some
questions
from
landowners
over
the
past
week
or
so
I
guess
trying
to
separate
myth
from
fact
or
clear
up
some
misconceptions.
One
of
the
things
that
I
was
asked
is:
does
the
city
have
a
target
quota
for
the
number
of
for
wetland
area?
Are
we
required
by
the
province
to
have
a
certain
target
number
of
hectares
of
wetlands
within
the
City
of
Ottawa?
No.
G
G
D
Councillor
I'd
like
to
answer
that
question
start
to
answer
that
question
by
reading
the
conclusions
from
two
reports
that
were
done,
that
looked
specifically
at
that
issue.
One
was
the
2006
report
by
Robinson
consultants
that
was
looking
at
the
flowing
Creek
Hobbs
drain
issue,
and
they
did
take
a
look
at
the
quarry
issue
there.
Mr.
Wesley
made
reference
to
this
one.
D
It's
it's
7-7
conclusions,
but
they're
relatively
quick.
So
if
you'll
indulge
me
one,
the
original
drainage
area
upstream
of
culvert
number
six
has
increased
from
approximately
75
hectares
to
almost
720
hectares
through
the
diversion
of
flow
from
the
flowing
Creek
watershed
to
the
Conley
branch
of
the
Hobbs
drain
extension.
That's
mr.
Wesley
referred
to
that
he's
absolutely
correct.
That
was
a
result
of
blockages
along
chillun
Creek
to
historically
the
lands
upstream
of
Fluellen
Road
and
in
the
vicinity
of
the
cpr
embankment,
had
better
drainage
and
less
standing
water
than
at
present.
D
This
is
evidenced
by
culverts
and
the
railway
embankment
that
are
now
largely
submerged.
Also
quite
true.
Beaver
blockages,
along
those
along
those
water
courses,
had
backed
water
up.
Sometimes,
over
top
of
this,
the
the
rail
line,
3
pumped
discharge
from
quarries
in
the
areas
do
contribute
to
the
persistent
base
flow
that
is
observed
along
Conley
Road
base
flow
is
the
low
flow
in
summertime.
The
trickle
of
water
that
you'll
see
in
the
bottom
of
the
ditch
for
pumping
has
little
impact
on
the
peak
flows
associated
with
storm
events.
D
Five
in
a
number
of
locations
downstream
channel
constrictions
appeared
to
reduce
the
capacity
of
the
existing
culverts.
That,
again,
is
when
you
a
beaver
dam
backs
water
up
through
a
culvert.
The
culvert
has
less
capacity
the
impact
unexpected
development,
such
as
the
widening
of
highway
seven,
will
not
have
a
measurable
impact
on
flows,
and
then
restoration
of
the
original
drainage
patterns
will
reduce
both
peak
flows
and
base
flow
along
Connolly
Road.
D
So
it
was
a
conclusion
of
Robinson
in
2006
when
they
looked
at
that
that
area,
the
pumpkin
by
the
quarry's
was
not
having
any
significant
impact
on
the
water
levels
in
the
area.
The
conclusion
phase
two
of
our
cumulative
effects
study,
which
was
done
by
SLR
consulting
looked
specifically.
We
asked
him
to
look
specifically
at
the
issue
of
quarry
pumping
and
these
were
their
their
conclusions.
D
Examination
of
stream
hydrographs.
This
is
water
levels
and
streams
in
comparison
to
precipitation
events.
Ie
rainfall
show
a
high
correlation
between
stream
levels
and
precipitation.
Changes
to
water
levels
are
commensurate
with
the
rainfall,
duration
and
rainfall
intensity,
as
would
be
expected.
Other
effects,
such
as
seasonal
conditions,
wet
or
dry,
have
an
influence
of
well
even
diurnal.
Daily
fluctuations
follow
a
predictable
pattern
and
show
the
influence
of
evapotranspiration
from
the
wetlands
flanking
the
water
courses.
Well,
that's
to
say
is
that
precipitation
and
evapotranspiration
are
really
the
main
things
driving
water
levels.
D
It
is
very
difficult
to
see
the
effect
of
quarry
pumping
events
on
stream
levels
and,
indeed,
analysis
of
water
volumes
show
that
precipitation
volumes
far
outstrips
the
contribution
from
quarries
analysis
of
precipitation.
Events
shows
that,
typically,
the
quarries
do
not
pump
until
the
peak
stream
flow
has
passed.
There
is
usually
a
period
of
sustained
quarry
pumping
out
early
in
the
year
to
prepare
the
quarries
for
the
construction
season.
However,
volumes
are
small
in
comparison
to
normal
streamflow
volumes.
D
The
flow
generated
from
the
quarries
does
not
exceed
flow
from
precipitation
and
events
and
typically
has
little
influence
on
stream
levels.
Based
on
these
observations,
we
conclude
that
water
discharges
by
bedrock
quarries
upstream
of
the
flow
monitoring
stations
have
little
or
no
potential
to
contribute
to
the
creation
or
expansion
of
wetlands
downstream
from
the
quarries.
To
summarize
all
of
that,
basically,
the
there
is
very
little
groundwater
flow
into
those
quarries.
The
water
that
accumulates
in
those
quarries
is
basically
the
precipitation
that
falls
on
it.
That's
because
the
bedrock
there
is
very
shallow.
It's
very
tight.
D
The
quarries
typically
don't
start
pumping
until
they've
got
enough
water
to
you
know
to
make
it
a
worthwhile
thing
to
do,
and
so
they
don't
actually
start
pumping
when
the
water
starts
to
fall,
they
pump
afterward.
So
in
fact,
the
function
of
the
quarries
actually
reduces
peak
flows
in
those
streams
because
they
hold
the
water
that
normally
would
runoff
and
they
pump
it
later.
D
G
So
but
I
do
think
I'm
hearing
it
is
possible
because
mr.
mr.
Wesley
brought
it
out,
it
is
possible
that
there
are
obstructions
in
ditches
downstream
from
what,
whether
it's
from
quarries
or
otherwise.
So
what
I
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
is
if
those
ditches
end
up
being
clear,
cleared.
What
is
the
process
if
the
landowner
wants
to
have
a
particular
property
re-evaluated?
This
has
happened
on
a
cyclical
basis,
every
5
or
10
years,
or
can
someone
go
to
the
Ministry
of
Natural
Resources
and
say
please
reevaluate
this
now?
D
G
D
I
actually
I
should
address
the
the
issue
that
mr.
McCray
raised
since
you
bring
it
bring
it
up,
and
it
also
gets
back
to
the
question
of
why
we
expanded
the
wetland
evaluation
outside
the
boundaries
of
the
Welland
special
study
area
overlay.
So
when
we
went
to
the
when
we
first
initiated
discussions
with
the
Minister
of
Natural,
Resources
and
forestry
about
the
scope
of
the
wetland
reevaluation,
we
understood
going
in
that
they
would
not
support
limiting
that
revaluation
to
the
boundaries
of
that
overlay
area.
D
Wetlands,
don't
respect
policy
boundaries,
turtles
plants,
flooding,
doesn't
respect
policy
policy
boundaries,
and
so
the
wetland
evaluation
system
is
based
on
ecological
boundaries.
So
we
knew
they
would
not
support
limiting
the
re-evaluation
to
the
special
study
overlay
and
in
fact,
when
we
met
with
them,
they
confirmed
that
we
did,
however,
ask
them
if
we
could
limit
the
re-evaluation
to
the
boundaries
of
the
current
wetland
complex.
That
is,
we
asked
the
question.
Do
we
need
to
consider
wetlands
that
could
be
complexed
in
some
new
wetlands
areas,
and
we
said
we
would
rather
not
do
that.
D
Complexing
in
new
wetlands
would
defeat
the
purpose
of
the
few.
On
special
study
or
process,
which
was
to
settle
land-use
questions,
not
to
create
more
of
them,
and
so
they
agreed
that
yes,
we
could
actually
limit
that
reevaluation
to
the
current
boundaries
of
the
wetland
complex,
and
so
we
gave
those
instructions
to
our
our
consultant
and
that's
what
happened?
Okay,.
G
Thank
you,
I
think
the
last.
It's
a
comment
that
I'm
hoping
councillor
Moffat
will
address
in
relation
to
his
motion.
I
understand,
I,
think
I
understand
what
councillors
councillor
Moffitt's
motion
is
trying
to
do
it.
Just
it
just
means
that
we
want
to
be
designated.
We
want
to
be
changing
the
zoning
right
now,
because
it's
provincially
significant
wetland
that
would
still
be
protected
by
development,
but
it
just
it
simplifies
the
process
of
landowners
want
to
take
that
to
the
to
the
ministry.
G
G
We've
been
fifteen
year
process
and
I'm
concerned
about
the
costs
and
the
resources
from
city
staff
if
this
process
gets
extended
any
further,
not
just
from
a
cost
point
of
view,
but
just
this
is
an
incredibly
complex
and
controversial
file
and
beyond
the
hard
costs
I
imagine
for
staff,
it's
probably
a
very
frustrating
and
just
from
a
human
resources
point
of
view,
one
that
I
think
we'd
all
like
to
have
wrapped
up
as
soon
as
possible,
so
I'm
hoping
in
councillor
Moffitt's
remarks
he
can
touch
on
a
couple
of
those
items.
Thank
you
mr.
chair.
G
H
You
chair:
this
is
the
second
time
that
I
I
was
a
member
of
Iraq,
and
a
new
member
of
Council
have
dealt
with
a
lot
of
trouble
when
it
comes
to
the
designation
where
the
previously,
a
few
months
ago,
we
had
the
problems
with
people
being
affected
by
changes
to
the
flood
map.
Flood
plain
mapping
and
now
I
realize
that
this
is
a
not
been
an
ongoing
issue,
but
here
we've
got
people
who
are
challenging
they.
H
You
know
the
extent
of
the
wetlands
so
and
previously
we
heard
that
they
the
way
that
the
floodplain
had
been
mapped
us
is
through
satellite
and
and
and
the
methods
seem
to
be
challenged
by
a
few
people.
So
I'm
wondering
how
did
Dylan
what
was
the
process
or
the
methodology
that
Dylan
used
in
order
to
expect
to
expand
these
boundaries
and
did
they
work
with
a
wetlands
evaluator
which
you're
recommending
that
people
use
if
they're
going
to
be
challenging
the
findings
of
this
view
of
the
report.
D
Through
you,
mr.
chair,
so
yes,
the
Dylan
staff
who
worked
on
the
wetland
evaluation
were
qualified
wetland
evaluators.
That
is,
a
requirement
of
the
process.
Dylan
used
a
combination
of
aerial
photography
and
on-the-ground
evaluation,
confirmation
of
wetlands
they
so
typically
and
their
report
actually
outlines
their
methodology.
You
initially
start
with
an
analysis
of
aerial
photography.
It's
usually
spring
photography
so
that
you
can
see
the
ground
and
you
draw.
D
They
would
have
gone
out
and
did
go
out
and
look
at
the
boundaries
from
the
ground
where
they
had
access
and
the
majority
of
property
owners
in
this
area
either
did
not
respond
to
our
request
for
for
access
or
did
not
provide
access
to
their
to
their
properties,
and
so
Dylan
went
out
and
did
ground
truthing
on
on
some
of
the
properties
where
they,
where
they
had
access
and
where
they
felt
that
they
needed
to
do
so.
So
it
was
a
mix
of
air
photo
interpretation
and
on
on
the
ground,
verification.
So.
H
How
accurate
do
you
think
this
process
is
when
you
have
people
here,
challenging
that
they
don't
feel
that
their
property
I
mean
I,
don't
want
to
say
it's
blaming
the
the
victim
here
if
they
didn't
participate,
or
they
didn't
know
what
where
it
was
being
asked
of
them.
But
how
accurate
is
this
when
you
have
people
challenging
this
right
now
and
and
and
saying
that
they're
their
livelihood
is
at
stake?
They
need
to
know
that
this
process
is,
but
they
can
rely
on
it
right.
D
So
again
through
mr.
chair,
I
am
also
qualified
wetland
evaluator.
So
I've
done
this
kind
of
work.
The
accuracy
depends
upon
whether
or
not
you
have
access
to
the
ground
or
whether
you're
just
relying
upon
aerial
photography,
and
it
also
depends
upon
the
type
of
vegetation,
so
the
most
accurate
way
to
to
map
the
wetland
boundary
is
through
on-the-ground
verification,
and
in
that
case
we're
talking
usually
about
plus
or
minus
five
meters,
or
so
every
wetland
evaluator
will
give
you
a
slightly
different
opinion.
D
But
it's,
but
you
know
five
meters
15
feet
or
so
is
a
pretty
pretty
standard
for
that
situation.
Using
aerial
photography,
it
depends,
as
I
said,
upon
the
vegetation.
If
the
if
the
topography
is,
is
very
rough,
you
often
have
wetlands
with
very
clearly
delineated
boundaries,
so
a
rock
Bluff
drops
into
a
marsh
there's
no
question
there
about
the
where
the
wetland
is
and
that
can
be
identified
with
with
high
accuracy
using
era,
photography
and
topographic
mapping.
D
This
landscape
is
particularly
challenging
because
it's
very
undulating
and
so
and
much
of
it
is
covered
by
dense,
cedar
forests.
So
when
you're,
looking
at
the
boundary
of
a
wetland
on
very
shallow
undulating
topography-
and
you
can't
actually
see
the
ground
through
the
cedar
forests,
aerial
photography
can
be
off
by
tens
of
meters,
and
so
in
that
case,
it's
always
preferable
to.
H
D
First
of
all,
as
I
said,
the
majority
of
property
owners
did
not
give
us
either
did
not
respond
to
our
request
or
didn't
give
us
permission
to
go
on
their
property,
so
we
had
to
rely
so
Dylan
had
to
rely
solely
on
aerial
photography
on
the
property,
the
properties
that
Dylan
did
have
permission
to
go
on.
They
did
not
visit
all
of
the
properties
in
their
judgment.
They
felt
that
they
did
not
need
to
do
so,
and
the
Ministry
confirmed
their
findings.
D
Subsequent
to
that,
I
was
contacted
by
a
number
of
property
owners
who
had
provided
such
as
after
the
ministry
had
approved
the
wetland
boundaries.
I
was
contacted
by
a
number
of
property
owners
who
had,
given
their
permission,
had
not
had
been
contacted
by
Dylan,
so
Dylan
had
not
done
ground
truthing
on
their
property
and
they
were
questioning
the
boundaries
that
Dylan
had
identified
in
those
cases,
because
we
had
I
felt
made
a
moral
or
ethical
commitment
to
those
particular
landowners
that
the
boundaries
would
be
ground.
D
Truth
I
went
out
into
the
ground,
truthing
myself,
so
this
was
after
Dylan's.
Contract
had
already
been
completed
and,
in
most
cases,
I
agreed
with
Dylan's
findings,
but
there
were
two
areas
where
I
disagreed
and
I
submitted
my
findings
to
the
ministry
and
the
Ministry
adjusted
the
boundaries
again
based
upon
the
work
that
I
did
well,
it's
interesting.
So
it
is.
D
H
Think
you
know
it
can
I,
don't
want
to
say
it's
hit
and
miss,
but
I
think
we
could
avoid
some
of
the
discrepancies
or
the
the
arguments
about.
They
feel
that
you
know
if
we
can
make
sure
that
the
evaluators
have
gone
in
if
you
can
prove
that
it
wasn't
just
an
aerial
photo
that
you
know
arbitrarily
or
not.
It's
not
arbitrary.
Obviously,
it's
it's
based
on
certain.
You
know
scientific,
but
if
we
could
avoid
some
of
the
disputes
that
we're
having
here,
if
we
can
say
look
at,
we
were
out
there.
H
A
My
question,
first
of
all,
I
would
like
to
thank
all
the
delegates
for
coming
out
today
and
present
to
us
at
the
committee
I'd
like
to
thank
staff
as
well
for
their
diligent
and
work
on
this
file
and
councillor
Gower
right.
This
is
just
like
a
groundhog
days
from
2005.
Some
of
us
been
sitting
around
the
table.
Dealing
with
this
fire
and
I
can
assure
you
it's
not
it's
not
over
yet
question
to
our
legal
staff.
A
So
we
have
councillor
Moffitt's
motion
on
the
front
for
us
and
said,
therefore
be
it
resolved
that
agricultural
fair
committee
recommend
the
council
replaced
flew
on
a
map
a
to
I,
founded
in
document
to
OPA
schedule,
1a,
1b
and
1c,
found
in
document
and
with
that
replacement
map.
So
basically
we're
going
back
to
the
2009
original
it's
outside.
So
my
understanding
this
is
this
nothing's
going
to
be
part
of
the
OPA
and
we
are
in
a
process
of
developing
the
OPA.
G
E
E
The
city
is
going
through
a
comprehensive
official
plan
exercise
and
that
will
go
up
to
the
ministry
sometime
in
2021
and
the
province
could
simply
modify
the
official
plan
to
show
the
significant
wetlands
as
the
provinces
believes
them
to
be,
and
there
is
no
appeal
by
the
city
or
by
anybody
else
from
that.
If
the
province
were
to
proceed
in
that
second
fashion,
okay,.
A
Thank
you
very
much
mr.
Tyler,
for
this
clarification
colleague,
I
would
ask
you
and
I
know.
Counsel
Murphy
was
before
this
motion,
but
I
would
ask
you
to
support,
counsel,
Moffitt's
motion
and
the
reason
for
that.
We
have
all
along
working
with
the
scope
of
the
study
area,
and
now
we
see
ourselves
gone
outside
the
disco,
Bay,
Area
and
I
know
again.
This
is
not
going
to
be
the
final
say
here,
but
I
just
hope.
A
We
support
that
and
send
a
message
and
I
have
to
agree
with
councillor
Moffat
the
province
has
the
tendency
to
troll
municipality
in
that
area.
I
think
the
landfill
is
one
prime
example:
they
approved
the
EA,
the
service
area
and
all
the
above,
and
then
they
asking
the
city
to
to
do
that.
Rezoning
and
then
we
get
residents
say
well,
don't
don't
resolve
them?
Well,
what
already
the
province
accept
that,
but
then
it
put
us
in
a
difficult
situation,
so
I
want
to
thank
staff
for
their
due
diligence.
A
D
C
Right
thanks
for
that
I.
Think,
though,
there's
that
there's
this
is
vanity.
Anyone
who's
paying
attention
to
anything
that
I'm
involved
in
know
that
I
have
countless
challenging
files
that
I
probably
take
positions
on
that
are
contrary
to
people
that
I
represent.
That
said,
this
has
been
the
most
challenging
file.
I've
ever
dealt
with,
because
I
can't
seem
to
find
a
place
to
sit
on
it.
That
really
makes
sense
to
me
and
that's
a
bit
of
a
challenge
for
me.
C
I
know
that
if
I
was
a
regular
politician,
I
would
just
flip
this
and
say
no
to
it
and
try
to
get
my
colleagues
staying
out
of
it
or
just
let
them
not
say
no
to
it
and
then
I
would
say
face,
but
I
I
don't
do
that,
and
I
would
prefer
that
the
province,
just
you
know,
to
councillor
Gower's
question.
If
the
province
wants
this
to
be
designated
Britain
designated
I,
don't
think
they
would
reality,
I,
don't
think
the
M&R
cares
enough.
C
I
think
they
are
okay
to
take
our
maps
and
approve
them,
but
would
they
actually
come
out
and
designate
lands
in
any
miss
paui
I
disagree!
I!
Don't
think
they
would
and
I
think
it
kind
of
sets
us
up
for
for
being
just
like
with
the
landfill
we
sat
here,
countless
residents
from
Carlsbad
Springs
tearing
us
a
new
one
and
that
we
care
about
the
community,
the
province
or
West
Karla.
The
province
approves
something
and
we're
left
to
deal
with
it
and
I
don't
care
which
governments
in
place.
It's
all
the
same.
C
So
in
that
regard,
in
order
to
make
some
decision
that
makes
sense
to
me,
I
felt
that
it
makes
sense
to
go
back
to
what
residents
expected
and
I
would
agree
that
residents
would
prefer
that
these
lands
not
be
designated,
but
we
went
through
ten
year
process.
We
allowed
for
seven
years
of
review
we
allowed
for
to
further
years
of
further
review
following
the
mapping
for
landowners
to
be
able
to
go
out
there
and
and
do
their
own
assessments
and
bring
them
back
for
further
evaluation.
C
C
So
when
you
have
a
report
that
comes
forward
that
all
of
a
sudden
goes
beyond
that,
I
think
it
makes
it
difficult
for
us
to
be
able
to
defend
that
or
to
explain
the
residents
while
you
should
have
known,
because
I
don't
know
that
they
should
have
known,
especially
when
you're
talking
about
lands
north
of
north
of
highway.
Seven
outside
of
this
area
quite
significantly
and
incited
an
entirely
different
watershed.
C
C
A
Thank
you,
Thank
You
counsel,
Murphy.
So,
on
that
council
muffins
motion,
it's
a
nice
place.
Okay,
okay,
thank
you
very
much
on
the
report.
Kate
is
recommended.
Thank
you
very
much.
Yes,
and
now
we
have.
We
have
no
our
attack.
We
have
no
open
mic
now
notes
of
motions
or
for
consideration
as
substance
meeting,
not
inquiries,
none
other
business
adjournment
or
next
meeting
folks
going
to
be
March
5th
2020.
Thank
you
very
much.