►
From YouTube: Planning Committee – January 24, 2019
Description
Planning Committee meeting – January 24, 2019 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
B
A
Everybody,
this
is
a
public
meeting
to
consider
the
proposed
comprehensive
official
plan
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
listed
as
items
one
to
five
on
today's
agenda.
For
the
items
just
mentioned,
only
those
who
make
all
submissions
today
or
written
submissions
before
the
amendments
are
adopted
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
local
planning
Appeal
Tribunal.
In
addition,
the
applicant
may
appeal
the
matter
to
the
local
planning
Appeal
Tribunal.
A
If
you
have
any
motions
on
any
of
the
items
listed
today,
it's
really
helpful
if
you
send
a
copy
to
us
ahead
of
the
public
delegation,
so
that
committee
members
of
staff
have
an
opportunity
to
review
and,
more
importantly,
the
people
they're
coming
to
make
the
delegations
that
are
coming
forward.
So
they
know
you
know
what
we're
thinking.
If
there's
a
chance
to
have
that
information
ahead
of
time,
it
helps
clarify
the
motion
during
the
discussion
of
the
matter.
So
thank
you.
B
A
Thank
you
all
for
being
here
today
for
the
first
planning
committee
of
the
new
term
of
council.
We
don't
have
an
especially
full
agenda
today
which
of
course
is
never
the
norm,
but
I
thought
it
was
a
good
opportunity
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
where
we're
going.
This
in
this
term
planning
committee
is
the
busiest
of
all
the
Standing
Committees
of
Council,
and
it's
where
we
get
such
a
light
agenda.
A
We
often
refer
to
it
as
the
big
committee
that
just
keeps
on
givin
there's
no
shortage
of
interesting
planning
matters
to
consider
in
this
city,
usually
with
healthy
and
vigorous
debate
and
the
end,
giving
that,
given
the
planning
departments,
ambitious
work
plan
for
the
year
ahead,
it's
fair
to
say
we're
not
likely
to
see
a
dip
in
our
workload.
This
is
probably
a
good
time
for
me
to
welcome
our
newest
committee
members
councillors.
A
Do
this
gala
and
Moffat,
although
certainly
councillor
Moffat,
is
new
to
this
committee,
but
he's
not
new
around
City
Hall
over
the
last
term
of
council.
Every
member
of
this
committee
could
time
and
again
how
invested
they
were
in
trying
to
guide
the
best
version
of
Ottawa
possible
I'm
sure
our
newest
members
will
all
bring
that
same
level
of
interest
in
planning
matters
and
engagement
around
each
file
that
comes
before
us.
A
As
always
as
we
move
through
each
agenda,
we
continue
to
have
the
expertise
of
an
incredible
team
of
city
planners
at
our
disposal
to
help
guide
deliberations,
not
to
mention
a
knowledgeable
legal
staff.
Planning
regulations
can
sometimes
be
arcane
and
complex,
but
I'd
like
to
thank
staff
for
their
continued
good
work
and
the
guidance
they
provide
to
members
of
the
committee.
You
are
always
prepared
to
answer
your
question,
answer
our
questions
and
make
sure
we
understand
exactly
what's
before
us,
and
sometimes
that's
not
easy.
A
It
can
be
very
confusing
you're
going
to
be
an
important
resource
for
us
over
the
course
of
this
term
of
council.
In
particular,
we
have
some
major
pieces
of
work
coming
up
over
the
next
year.
One
of
the
biggest
undertakings
over
the
next
four
years
will
be
the
development
of
a
new
official
plan
that
work
will
officially
get
underway
at
our
next
meeting
on
February
14th.
In
fact,
we
will
discuss
a
report
called
Ottawa
next,
beyond
2036,
a
mr.
Willis
will
be
making
a
presentation
at
that
job
meeting.
A
So
heads
up
to
a
few
media
that
are
here,
you
definitely
will
want
to
mark
that
on
your
calendar.
Ottawa
next
is
not
a
specific
vision
for
the
future
of
Ottawa,
but
it
does
explore
a
variety
of
scenarios
that
look
well
beyond
the
next
20
years
to
identify
some
of
the
challenges
we'll
need
to
consider
as
we
prepare
a
new
official
plan.
Developing
a
new
official
plan
is
a
complex
process,
one
that
will
include
substantial
public
consultation
and
that
will
also
require
occasional
guidance
from
our
committee.
A
A
We
can
expect
to
see
a
report
this
year
on
a
recent
staff
review
of
the
site
plan
control
application
process
as
well,
along
with
recommendations
to
help
make
the
process
more
efficient
and
more
cost
effective.
Of
course,
all
of
this
is
on
top
of
a
regular
slate
of
site-specific
land-use
planning
matters
to
consider,
including
a
great
many
official
plan
and
zoning
bylaw
amendments
for
everything,
for
small
projects
to
large-scale
developments
and
entire
subdivisions.
A
Okay,
any
declarations
of
interest.
None
confirmation
of
minutes
of
the
November
20th
2018
meeting
should
be
someone
who
was
on
the
committee
carried.
Thank
you
I.
Remember
one
is
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment
for
180,
Island,
Park,
Drive
and
they'll
be
holding
that,
as
did
you
say
home,
but
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
people
in
the
audience
that
already
made
that
decision,
so
we're
holding
that
item
item
number
two.
C
B
A
A
A
Perfect
spoke
enough
last
night.
So
is
this
item
carry
thank
you.
Zoning
bylaw
amendment
by
75,
dealership
Drive
in
my
George,
damn
Paquette's
here,
hi
Dan.
Does
anyone
have
any
questions
on
on
this
application
or
McKenna
Lauren
dan?
Do
you
need
to
speak
if
we're
prepared
to
carrier?
Thank
you
very
much
he's
a
Ken.
Great
scary.
A
B
Thanks
madam
chair
I'll
dispense
with
the
novel
that
I
could
be.
Data
for
arouses
the
nuts
and
bolts
is.
This
is
just
to
set
the
timing
better
with
built
a
belt
head
should
subcommittee
reports
so
therefore
be
resolved,
that
the
planning
committee
defer
consideration
to
draft
revised
terms
of
reference
until
exact
the
revised
bill.
Carat
of
subcommittees
terms
of
reference
have
been
submitted
to
the
planning
community
for
considerations
currently
expected
for
February
14th
planning
communicating
so.
A
That
the
two
of
them
come
to
Council
the
same
ad
council
meeting.
Okay,
that
carry
center,
fails
Carrie,
okay,
and
then
we
have
an
IP
D
and
information
previously
distributed
on
inclusionary
zoning,
okay,
and
we
also
or
yet
we
have
another
emotion
to
be
added
today,
this
one's
going
to
take
2/3
of
the
voting
of
us
voting
to
to
put
it
onto
the
agenda
for
discussion
today
and
did
you
introduce
the
motion?
It's
some.
B
Great
charity.
No,
madam
chair
that
the
planning
committee
approved
the
addition
of
the
following
items
agenda
for
consideration
by
the
committee
at
this
meeting
pursuant
to
section
8089
3
of
the
procedural
bylaw
in
order
to
give
timely
consideration
to
the
matter
as
there's
not
been
a
committee
meeting
since
November
and
the
applicant
would
like
to
apply,
would
like
to
apply
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
as
soon
as
possible.
So
where's
who
reports
for
168
Daly
Avenue
was
approved
at
the
council.
January
31st
2018.
B
2018
2018
to
permit
the
office
limited
by
the
embassy
was
the
owner
would
like
to
undertake
renovations,
including,
but
not
limited
to
the
porch
construction.
That
would
necessitate
a
need
for
minor
variances
to
the
zoning
bylaw
2008
250
and
whereas
the
procedural
where
the
proposed
porch
construction
is
consistent
with
the
applicable
guidelines
with
the
Heritage
Conservation
District
and
represents
a
good
heritage
conservation
practices,
where
section
45
1.3
of
the
Planning
Act,
does
not
permit
the
applicant
not
permit
an
application
for
minor
variants.
B
Before
a
second
anniversary
of
the
initial
zoning
amendments,
January
31st
2020,
whereas
section
45
1.3
of
the
Planning
Act
permits
council
to
declare
the
resolution
that
such
an
application
would
be
permitted
and
get
to
now.
Therefore,
it
be
resolved
that
planning
committee
recommend
to
council
that
the
application
to
committee
of
adjustment
be
permitted
and
respect
to
the
property
at
1/16.
Do
Avenue
variances
associated
with
the
proposed
renovations.
B
A
Okay,
so
before
we
get
to
this
on
the
agenda,
if
we
lift
it
just
for
those
in
the
audience
councillor
Gower
is
now
the
chair
of
built
heritage
subcommittee,
so
I
appreciate
who
is
Court
here
or
Dana,
or
anybody
on
the
okay?
Can
you
have
a
chat
with
with
him?
You
know
when
you
get
an
opportunity,
but
really
what
it
is.
They
want
to
add
a
porch.
It
fits
into
the
Heritage
District.
They
need
to
get
go
to
committee
of
adjustment
still,
and
so
we
have
to
provide
the
opportunity
for
that
to
happen.
A
A
A
A
A
D
Thank
you
mention.
My
name
is
Paul
quarter
I'm
a
19
year
resident
of
Island,
Park
Drive,
and
vice
president,
the
Island
Park
Community
Association,
and
we're
here
to
oppose
the
rezoning
of
180
Island
Park.
We
believe
the
zoning
is
not
consistent
with
the
residential
uses
in
the
neighborhood.
The
residence
is
a
Long
Island,
Park
Drive
form
a
community
not
because
they
look
like
single-family
homes
or
are
go
exist
with
single-family
homes,
but
because
they
are
single-family
homes,
people
live
in
them.
People
raise
families
inland
they
occupy
them
outside
of
business
hours.
D
They
even
appear
before
committees
to
defend
and
protect
them.
They
have
a
stake
in
them
as
places
to
live
along
with
neighbors
who
also
live
in
the
area.
So
the
non-residential
use
does
not
fulfill
that
function.
The
RNR
one
is
where
far
as
we're
concerned
stands
for
residential.
The
very
fact
that
the
proposed
office
function
does
not
cannot
be
accommodated
in
the
current
dwelling
and
cannot
be
accommodated
because
if
the
single-family
residence
shows
the
incompatibility
of
the
proposed
used
with
the
single-family
character
of
the
site
and
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
D
Secondly,
the
impact
of
the
rezoning
is
significant.
The
Planning
report
refers
to
the
site
is
on
the
periphery
of
the
neighborhood,
but
this
is
misleading.
It's
well
within
the
gate
we
established
by
the
NCC
at
the
northern
edge
of
the
neighborhood.
It
is
surrounded
by
single
family
homes
on
three
sides.
D
Even
the
rezoning
application
itself
stresses.
The
prominence
of
the
site
is
the
first
property
on
the
west
side
that
you
meet
when
you
come
from
the
parkway
into
the
neighborhood,
given
its
prominence,
it's
anything
but
peripheral
to
the
identity,
the
street
and
the
of
the
local
area,
and
it's
no
less
deserving
of
protection
under
current
r1
zoning
than
any
other
address
on
the
street.
D
Thirdly,
the
rezoning
for
office
used
reverses
almost
a
hundred
years
of
policy.
It's
against
the
NCC
covenants
that
established
the
neighborhood
in
the
20s.
It's
not
permitted
under
the
long-standing
r1
zoning
in
the
area.
It
was
deliberately
excluded
under
zoning
changes
in
the
late
80s
it
was
deemed
non-conforming
in
2010,
which
means
it
should
revert
to
a
proper
r1
use.
D
Staff
claims
that
the
l1
protections
remain
on
the
street
and
elsewhere
in
other
neighborhoods,
while
at
the
same
time
arguing
that
an
office
building
is
compatible
with
the
surrounding
single-family
residences
in
an
r1
zone.
This
strikes
us
as
a
tenuous
position.
If
an
embassy
is
okay
at
this
address
and
I've
embarked
more,
not
at
other
addresses,
and
if
an
embassy
office
is
okay
in
our
one
zone,
why
not
other
office
uses
as
well
granted?
D
This
is
not
what
staff
intends,
but
the
construction
of
an
office
building
was
never
intended
for
Island
Park
either
when
we
allowed
diplomatic
missions
and
welcomed
the
moans
of
the
street
and
when
previous
rezoning
application
was
rejected.
Yet
here
we
are
facing
a
staff
recommendation
that
all
previous
intentions
be
contravened
staff
assurances,
notwithstanding
the
logic
of
their
argument
that
non-residential
office
building
belongs
in
this
area,
is
ripe
for
exploitation
and
other
addresses
on
the
street
and
in
other
r1
zones.
D
Meanwhile,
any
other
argument
they
could
give
for
blocking
office
uses
elsewhere
seem
to
me
to
apply
to
this
site
just
as
well.
Finally,
reasonable
alternatives
exists
or
the
rezoning
is
unnecessary.
There
has
been
no
justification
in
the
staff
report
or
anywhere
else
for
giving
the
Thai
embassies
desire
to
build
an
office
building
on
this
site
priority
over
the
wishes
of
residents
and
long-standing
policy.
They
remain
free
to
refurbish
a
rebo
the
residents.
They
can
build
an
office
elsewhere
in
the
city
on
a
appropriately
zone
site.
D
These
are
the
same
options
open
to
every
other
embassy
on
the
street,
and
every
other
Embassy
has
accepted
them.
The
community
has
been
given
no
justification
for
granting
the
Thai,
Embassy
and
exceptional
privilege
in
this
regard.
So
as
stewards
as
stewards
of
the
heritage
of
the
city
and
its
long-standing
neighborhoods,
we
really
implore
you
to
reject
this
rezoning
of
180
Island
Park
Drive.
Thank
you
very
much.
So.
A
I
just
have
a
question
for
you,
certainly
so
it
gives
a
gives.
You
know,
whoever
comes
because
I,
you
know
we
have
been
talk.
I've
been
talking
with
other
members
of
committee
document
by
Vice
Chair
chairing
this
morning
spoke
with
our
legal
staff.
It
gets.
You
know,
level
of
comfort
that
they
use
is
tied
specifically
to
the
embassy
itself
and
does
not
is
not
sustained,
whether
it's
older
or
whatever,
that,
as
you
know,
that
it's
an
embassy
use
only
that
gives
you
know
level
of
comfort.
He.
D
A
D
B
All
excellent
presentation-
and
they
agree,
obviously
with
everything
that
you
said
the
is
one
of
the
issues
that
is
coming
up
I
think
is
the
the
difference
that
somehow
an
embassy
is
different
from
an
office
building.
Do
you
see
any
functional
differences
between
having
an
office
building
or
an
embassy
on
the
street.
D
D
D
A
C
C
Also
here
as
a
representative
of
the
Westborough
Community
Association,
like
my
colleague
before
me,
and
colleagues
that
are
going
to
speak
to
you
after
I
believe
there's
a
few
more
speakers
were
against
this
application
visit
because
it
requests
a
spot
zoning
change
for
a
single
property
on
the
street
to
allow
an
office
building,
and
this
does
set
a
precedence
for
the
street.
The
neighborhood
ended
the
city
overall
one
on
earth.
C
Would
the
planners
allow
this
it's
a
100
year
old,
planned
residential
street
on
an
MCC
Parkway
system
that
has
six
embassy
residents
on
its
on
it:
a
church,
two
monuments,
a
Boulevard
and
one
of
the
finest
collection
of
mid
20th
century
homes
assembled
on
a
single
street
in
the
city.
There
are
others,
but
it
is
one
of
one
of
only
a
few.
For
many
years
now
and
against
the
wishes
of
the
community
in
the
city,
the
Thai
Embassy
has
been
flouting.
The
zoning
route
rules
has
been
used
as
an
office
with
no
residential
function.
C
Now
they
want
to
formalize
the
situation
and
they
need
to
change
the
zoning
to
do
it,
but
I
ask
you
if
they
want
an
office,
why
on
earth?
Wouldn't
they
their
operations
elsewhere
in
the
city
that
supports
the
appropriate
zoning
rather
than
disrupt
the
community
in
which
they
reside?
Why
are
they
putting
us
all
through
this?
Why
are
you
here?
Why
am
I
here?
Why
not
just
go
to
a
place?
That's
zoned
for
an
appropriate
office
building,
as
many
many
other
embassies
in
the
city
have
done
I
invite
you,
therefore,
to
consider
this.
C
There
are
27
embassies
in
Sandy,
Hill,
seven
in
the
Glebe
77
in
the
downtown
core,
two
in
Rockland,
seven
in
New
Edinburgh,
one
in
old,
Ottawa,
south
and
five
more
on
island
port
drive
five
more.
Several
of
these
districts
are
residential
and
have
distinctive
homes
of
heritage
character.
I
know
most
of
the
ones
in
the
core
are
actually
already
in
non-residential
situations,
but
almost
all
these
other
neighborhoods
are
residential
in
their
function.
If
you
approve
this,
you
are
opening
the
door
to
the
same
type
of
zoning
change
all
across
the
city.
C
The
staff
report
assures
us
that
in
our
one,
restrictions
will
remain
in
place
for
the
rest
of
the
street,
but,
as
I
just
mentioned,
there
are
five
other
embassy
residences
on
IPD,
and
if
one
of
these
asks
for
the
same,
how
could
they
be
denied?
The
answer?
Is
they
would
not?
The
planners
also
hasten
to
note
that
the
zoning
changes
would
only
apply
to
the
future.
Owners
of
the
property
would
not
apply
to
the
future
owners
of
the
property,
but
it
must
stay
within
the
embassy
function.
Well,
that's.
That's
ridiculous!
C
I,
don't
see
how
anyone
has
any
authority
over
what
future
bureaucrats
or
councils
will
decide
and
what
they
will
do
then
Island
Park
Drive,
if
it
all
the
Embassy's
made
that
decision
and
decided
they
wanted
a
piece
of
this
action.
Island
Park
Drive
would
no
longer
fulfill
its
function
as
a
planned
residential
community
integrated
with
the
city's
well
known,
Parkway
Drive
system
and
just
a
sidebar.
We
in
the
community
won't
be
appeased.
If
the
office
building
kind
of
looks
like
a
house,
it
is
the
use
of
the
property
and
its
attendant
owning
change.
C
That
is
the
biggest
issue
now
and,
of
course,
for
the
future.
So
we
ask
ourselves:
why
are
the
planners
putting
the
needs
of
the
embassy
first
rather
than
the
needs
of
the
community?
Its
actions
like
these
that
undermine
trust
in
the
city's
decision-making
processes
and
confidence
in
the
integrity
of
the
official
plan
and
I'm,
really
looking
forward
to
that
being
on
your
February
agenda,
we'll
all
be
watching
that
very
closely.
This
is
very
tightly
linked
together,
we're
extremely
unhappy
that
staff
has
approved
this
application.
C
A
A
You're
here
often
enough,
you
almost
need
a
special
place
to
either
park
the
car
in
rotten
weather.
Put
your
bike
in
good
weather
an
office.
Now
she
wants
and
Heather
is
the
co-chair
of
the
Champlain
Park
Community
Association.
You
know,
as
you
know,
Heather
you
have
five
minutes.
Jayla
presentation.
C
C
Sorry
I
just
reiterate
a
few
points
that
some
of
the
others
have
made.
Basically,
we
are
in
opposition
to
this
application.
We
barely
be
very
pleased
to
hear
that
the
owners
were
establishing
a
new
diplomatic
mission
in
full
compliance
with
the
r1p
residential
zoning,
the
mature
neighborhoods
overlay
and
alternative
provisions.
C
The
site
context
is
that
it's
been
part
of
Ottawa's
scenic
and
historic
Parkway
systems
for
almost
a
hundred
years.
Its
importance
was
implicitly
reaffirmed
in
the
global
plan,
which
created
this
parkway
system,
and
one
goal
was
to
make
the
city
aesthetically
pleasing.
This
is
the
first
residence
on
the
west
side
of
the
residential
gateway.
Any
discussion
of
this
property
behind
on
the
periphery
of
the
neighborhood
must
consider
the
full
context.
This
is
the
zoning
that
is
applicable
in
this
area.
C
C
The
nearest
commercial
properties
are
located
almost
achillea
doorway
on
the
IPD
Wellington
Street
Richmond
Road
intersection.
Some
are
being
constructive
of
700
metres
away
on
the
south
side
of
Scott
Street.
There
is
an
infrequent
OC
Transpo
bus,
so
it
goes
by
clear
view,
but
the
nearest
transit
stop
is
almost
800
metres
away,
so
an
office
building
this
location
would
be
isolated
and
not
contribute
in
any
way
to
a
lively
animated.
Streetscape
workers
were
made
to
drive
to
access
shops
and
restaurants,
office
workers
and
office.
C
Visitors
have
other
priorities
than
to
engage
with
commune
members
where,
as
an
ambassador
living
in
a
diplomatic
mission
is
a
resident
neighbor
who
has
a
stake
in
building
with
other
neighbors,
a
safe,
accessible,
vibrant
community.
This
is
a
distinctive
Street.
It's
listed
as
a
where
the
scenic
entry
routes
on
schedules,
I
and
J
of
the
Official
Plan.
C
C
We
note
that
non-conforming
lights
always
cease
when
there's
a
change
in
the
to
the
building
when
new
construction.
This
has
been
long-standing
protection
for
people
who
had
rights,
pre
zoning
change,
and
then
they
knew
that
at
some
point
they
would
have
to
give
those
rights
up
and
whatever
the
exterior
design
of
any
new
building
in
IPD
its
reversion
to
use
as
a
residence,
as
is
key.
If
we
zoned
and
we
built
as
an
office,
the
interior
would
not
be
suitable
for
residential
occupancy
in
the
future.
When
the
property
is
sold,
the
following
issues
will
arise.
C
The
city
has
no
power
to
restrict
the
sale
to
other
embassies,
and
these
are
the
only
buyers
who
could
legally
use
it
as
an
office.
The
owners
may
be
able
to
claim
that
the
exception
is
too
restrictive
because
it
limits
their
ability
to
realize
the
full
value
of
sale
of
a
commercial
building
they
or
the
next
owner
will
apply
to
rezone
the
property,
given
the
sparse
justification
presented
for
allowing
this
exception
in
the
first
place.
However,
future
for
rezoning
not
be
approved.
C
The
proposed
language
in
the
exemption
provision
and
the
language
in
the
staff
report
highlight
the
probability
that,
once
the
zoning
is
changed,
there
will
be
a
sale
and
that
further
rezoning
will
be
forthcoming.
They
say:
should
a
general
office
wish
to
locate
on
the
property
in
the
future.
The
proposals
appropriateness
would
need
to
be
a
value
through
rezoning
at
that
time.
I
contend
that
the
proposal
to
put
an
office
building
here
to
begin
with
is
not
appropriate.
C
I've
noted
that,
while
the
city
is
supportive
of
the
establishment
of
a
broad
mix
of
uses
in
Ottawa's
neighborhoods,
this
is
not
meant
to
imply
that
all
uses
will
be
permitted
everywhere
within
areas
that
are
designated
general
urban
area.
The
zoning
bylaw
will
continue
to
regulate
the
location,
scale
and
type
of
land
use
in
accordance
with
the
provisions
of
this
plan.
C
I
looked
at
the
Planning
Act
and
looked
at
the
matters
of
prevention
interest
and
of
note
Rd,
P,
R
and
Q
the
conservation
of
features
of
significant
architectural,
cultural,
historical,
archaeological
or
scientific
interest,
while
IPD
is
a
scenic
entry
route
and
part
of
Ottawa's
scenic
and
historic
park.
Where
systems,
as
reaffirmed
in
the
grubber
plan,
the
intent
of
the
our
one
exception,
2499
zoning
in
effect,
is
to
conserve
the
community's
cultural
and
historical
character.
Allowing
an
office
building
to
locate
here
is
inconsistent
with
conservation
of
this
character,
P
the
appropriate
location
of
growth
and
development.
C
B
Sure
I
just
want
to
make
sure
Heather
that
we
understand
the
argument
you're
making
with
respect
to
what
might
happen
here.
If
we
were
to
approve
the
rezoning,
that's
being
sought
that
would
clear
the
way
for
the
Royal
Thai
government
to
build
an
office
building
at
this
location.
It
would
be
subject
to
the
restriction
that
it
would
be
embassy
use
only
under
this
rezoning,
but
once
it's
an
office
building,
no
one's
going
to
purchase
it
as
a
house.
B
C
C
They
might
actually
get
that
and
set
aside
the
zoning
I
mean
even
legally,
they
might
be
able
to
successfully
argue
that
so
I
think
the
issue
is
that
we're
putting
an
office
building
in
an
area
and
in
spite
of
the
good
intentions
of
staff,
to
try
to
prevent
it
being
used
or
becoming
scale
office,
building
open
to
anybody.
I
think
that
that's
in
our
future.
So
it's
not
an.
B
C
B
A
D
B
A
D
B
B
So
it's
really
more
bottom
line
kind
of
questions
the
Saudi
embassy
is,
is
or
was
operating
under
a
bylaw
that
it
was
an
ambassador's
residence
and
that
there
could
be
some
embassy
related
office
business
conducted
in
the
building,
and
that,
of
course,
has
not
been
adhered
to
and
then
I
guess
the
city
has
just
let
it
happen,
and
on
so
now
there's
a
proposal
to
to
amend
the
zoning
bylaw
for
for
office
use
and
so
I
guess.
My
question
is:
what
is
the
actual
zoning?
Is
it?
B
Commercial
is
a
commercial
with
potential
other
uses
only
related
to
embassies?
Does
such
a
thing
actually
exist
and
therefore
what
what
would
prevent
that
building
from
being
used
for
other
purposes
than
related
to
the
embassy?
Even
while
the
Thai
Embassy
owns
the
property,
let
alone
if
they
decide
to
sell
and
and
other
businesses
decide
to
move
in
and
use
it
for
other
commercial
purposes.
So
I
would
just
be
very
concerned
about
the
precedent
that's
being
set
and
what
the
real
legal
input
implications
are
of
the
zoning
bylaw
amendment.
A
B
The
proposed
zoning
is
r1p
with
a
special
exception
and
a
holding
Symba,
with
a
special
exception
with
the
limit,
would
introduce
a
new
use
of
the
office
use
but
limited
to
an
embassy
building,
as
previously
mentioned,
that
would
also
transfer
over
some
setback
requirements
from
the
current
zoning
of
the
seven
and
a
seven
point:
six
mere
five
yard
setback
and
then
the
holding
symbol
would
preclude
them
to
have
a
site
approved
site
planning
agreement
before
they
remove
the
H
okay,
okay,
so
that's
all
written
down.
It's
all
part
of
the
zoning
designation.
B
B
Madam
chair
colloquially,
sometimes
embassy,
property
or
diplomatic
premises
are
referred
to
as
foreign
soil.
That
is
not
in
fact
the
case.
They
continued
to
be
under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
laws
of
Canada
and
had
such
a
zoning
bylaws.
There
are
limitations,
of
course,
on
what
enforcement
measures
can
be
taken.
Staff
would
not
be
permitted
to
go
in
and
inspect
an
office.
That
was
a
diplomatic
premises.
The
way
they
would
be
able
to
do
so
in
the
case
of
other
offices
that
didn't
have
that
special
status.
B
B
Not
chair?
No,
we
don't.
Okay,
so
the
we
don't
have
a.
We
don't
have
a
blueprint
for
what
the
building
is
going
to
look
like
they've,
given
us
some
concepts.
They
told
us
at
this
stage
that
they're
going
to
build
to
within
what
the
residential
zoning
will
allow,
but
there's
nothing
to
stop
them
from
determining
that
they
need
a
different
configuration
going.
B
The
committee
of
adjustment
to
seek
seek
variances
on
those
madam
chair,
just
like
anyone
else,
they'd
had
the
opportunity,
of
course,
you
and
me,
and
everyone
here
to
go
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
as
a
right
under
the
Planning
Act.
One
thing
we
did
do
in
terms
of
the
zoning
we
put
a
restriction
on
the
amount
of
the
size,
six
hundred
forty
five
square
meters
and
did
not
amend
any
of
the
performance
standards
through
this
rezoning.
B
A
B
A
B
In
remark
and
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
but
if
they
have
a
legal
non-conforming
right
to
be
there,
there's
been
an
embassy
full-blown
functioning
embassies
since
there
since
1987,
even
though
someone
has
been
living
there
say
in
the
past
at
some
time,
they're
still
all
the
embassy
functions
have
been
there.
They
have
a
legal
non-conforming
light
too,
and
if
they
tore
it
down,
they
would
have
to
go
there.
They
could
go
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
to
seek
expansion
of
a
legal
non-conforming
use
to
our
building,
that's
bigger
than
their
today.
That's.
B
A
B
The
second
piece
is,
is
I,
think
where
the
the
more
important
discussion
is,
our
zoning
bylaw
defines
the
r-1
zone
and
what
we're
trying
to
achieve
with
the
r-1
zone
as
to
regulate
development
in
a
manner
that
is
compatible
with
existing
land
use
patterns,
so
that
the
detached
dwelling
residential
character
of
a
neighborhood
is
maintained
or
enhanced.
That's
our
goal
for
our
one.
It
doesn't
stop
non-residential
uses
by
any
means,
but
in
our
one
zones
we
are
trying
to
maintain
those
as
detached
residential
character
of
the
neighborhood.
The
staff
report
doesn't
deal
with
that.
B
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
When
we
look
at
the
application
for
proposed
rezoning,
we
have
to
look
at
the
policies
of
the
Official
Plan
and
with
an
understanding
of
what
r1,
r2
or
r3
or
any
residential
zoning
is
what
the
intent
of
those
are.
But
when
you
look
at
the
policies-
and
this
is
a
general
urban
area
and
it
allows
commercial
uses,
non-residential
uses
in
certain
circumstances
and
still
whether
or
not
this
was
appropriate
in
reading
the
staff
report,
this
is
a
in
our
staffs.
Opinion
is
at
the
edge
of
the
community.
It's
on
the
periphery.
B
It's
a
secluded
area,
as
you
come
in
from
the
north
off
the
parkway,
so
keeping
in
mind
with
the
resident
we're
all
residential
zones
are
trying
to
allow
for
and
looking
at
the
policies
that
do
establish
or
you
can
have
non-residential
uses.
It
was
staffs
determination
that
it
was
appropriate
given
its
location
and
also
given
the
history
that
it
being
here
is
a
good
neighbor
for
over
30
years.
B
We
look
at
this
application
on
its
own
merit
for
this
location
and
we
determined
now
keeping
in
mind
as
they
say,
with
residential
zones
are
supposed
to
be
and
what
the
Official
Plan
says
you
can
do
to
allow
non-residential
uses
in
residential
areas.
We
felt
it
was
appropriate
for
committee
and
eventually
Council
to
approve
this
and
obviously
I,
disagree
that
you
know
putting
an
office
building.
We
speak
a
lot.
B
We
report
to
the
periphery,
but
this
is
there's
residential
behind
residential
to
the
side
residential
across
and
we're
not
talking
about
an
edge
condition
in
which
we
see
a
transition
in
intensity
of
use.
This
is
an
office
building
between
single
detached
homes
and
Portland
right.
If
this
is
going
to
stick
out
like
a
sore
thumb
and
I
I,
don't
think
it's
compatible
either
with
the
park
land
use
or
with
the
the
single
residential
that
is
next
to
it.
This
is
by
my
calculations,
a
kilometer
from
the
nearest
transit
station,
our
official
plan.
B
So
as
far
as
I
can
tell
it's
a
it's
a
good
kilometer
walk
from
me.
The
Westborough
are
from
Chinese
pasture.
Our
official
plan
has
policies
around
where
we're
trying
to
locate
employment,
nodes
employers
under
official
plan
when
we're
thinking
about
where
it
equips
employment.
You
know
this
is
a
16
parking
spot
office
building.
Is
this
the
right
place
to
put
an
employer
madam
chair?
Well,
we
do
have
policies
with
the
Official
Plan.
They
call
for
intensification,
of
course,
around
notes.
B
Taking
also
take
a
look
at
the
policies
for
general
urban
area
and
noting
that
all
commercial
were
non
residential
type
uses
well
located
within,
say
600
meters
of
a
transit
station,
so
they
will
be
located
outside
of
that
area
and,
as
you
say,
as
the
counselor
says,
madam
chair,
that
this
is
about
a
kilometer
way
under
the
policies.
Official
Plan
there's
still
the
opportunity
to
have
commercial
uses
beyond
that.
B
600
meter
Desire
circle
in
here
I
would
note
that
right
now,
there's
14
parking
spaces
they're
only
be
two
more
parking
spaces
and
actually
will
be
underground
this
time.
So
actually
in
reality,
it
will
green
up
the
site
a
little
bit,
but
there's
still
the
opportunity
under
policies
to
have
Commerce's
beyond
the
catchment
area
for
a
transit
station
correctly
formed
I.
B
Don't
think
the
point
of
our
grandfathering
rules,
I,
don't
think
the
points
of
our
non-conforming
use
rules
is
to
simply
assume
that
we
should
evaluate
a
new
application
in
the
context
of
something
that
was
non-conforming
and
I'm.
That's
what
I'm
hearing
here
is.
It
has
been
used
as
an
embassy
under
the
pretense
I
believe
of
being
a
residence
of
having
a
diplomatic
mission
attached,
but
they
do
have
that
non-conforming
use.
To
what
extent
should
we
be
considering
that
history
that
non-conforming
use
as
justification
to
approve
the
new
use?
B
Madam
chair
I,
think
that
couple
things
one
you
know
also
the
first
and
foremost
you
look
at
the
policies
that
the
council
is
established
with
the
Official
Plan,
but
also
in
terms
of
competitive
I.
Think
there
is
some
value
being
placed
on
what
has
happened
there
before
and
how
it
is
function
and
fit
into
the
community.
Whether
or
not
a
use
has
been
a
good
neighbour
or
not.
So
it
should
be
a
consideration
as
well
that
as
I
mention
again,
port
first
and
foremost
are
their
policies.
An
official
plan
and
again
I
will
disagree.
B
B
Sorry,
lawful,
okay!
Thank
you
very
much
councillor
coward.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
The
pub's
building
on
councillor
Leafers
last
point.
I
think
we
need
to
be
very
careful,
the
legal
non-conforming
use
and
and
not
thinking
that
as
a
pilot
project,
legal
non-conforming
as
grandfathering
an
unfortunate
term
I
think,
but
what
we're
allowing
a
use
for
a
site?
That's
not
part
of
a
zoning
almost
as
a
courtesy,
it's
not
a
pilot
project
and
as
part
of
legal
non-conforming
use
when
that
use
discontinues,
for
example.
In
this
case
of
this
building,
is
to
be
demolished.
B
It's
an
opportunity
for
our
committee
and
our
council
to
evaluate
if
that
usage
is
appropriate
in
the
current
context,
and
that's
really
I
think
what
we're
deciding
on
today.
We've
heard
for
residents
here
that
if
there
is
primary
uses
of
residents
and
officers
as
part
of
that
use,
that's
fine
and
that's
appropriate
to
the
communities,
but
to
change
it
to
an
office
building
is
a
significant
change
in
the
character
of
the
community.
B
I
also
think
of
my
neighborhood,
where
I
can
think
of
home
businesses
that
have
expanded,
and
you
know,
there's
more
and
more
people
working
in
the
day
in
office,
buildings,
sorry
in
office
environments
within
residential
areas
and
I'm.
Thinking
of
that
slippery
slope
that
a
decision
today
might
might
lead
to,
but
I
did
have.
One
question
which
was
one
of
the
presenters
brought
up:
mature,
neighborhoods,
overlay
and
I
was
just
curious
how
that
would
apply
to
to
the
zoning
or
to
the
specific
circumstance
on
Island
Park
in
this
in
this
application.
B
Thank
you
given,
given
the
section
130
non-residential
uses
in
residential
zones
that
was
brought
up
earlier
and
well,
whereas
any
non-residential
uses
in
a
residential
zone
are
subject
to
the
most,
so
the
highest
density
residential
uses
permitted
in
that
zone.
That
this
means
that
a
office
of
office
use
as
proposed
would
be
considered
as
a
residential
use
because
through
the
zoning,
therefore,
that
means
that
mature
neighborhoods
will
apply,
except
for
the
front
yard
setback,
because
the
front
yard
setback
was
established
through
a
zoning
exception
that
came
in
after
mature
neighborhoods.
B
B
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I,
think
it's
important
to
remember
when
we
look
at
this.
The
the
presentation
that
we
make
as
a
capital
to
visitors
and
Island
Park
Drive
is
a
place
you
people
go
to
as
tourists,
it's
a
place,
they
go
down
and
they
see
very
well
presented
residential
area
reading
to
connect
and
it's
a
significant
impression
that
that
makes
on
visitors
to
the
area
and
it's
largely
because
we've
defended
the
zoning
and
what
we
allow
there.
B
B
When
you
look
at
putting
in
a
different
use
and
you're
relying
in
order
to
agree
with
that
use,
you're
relying
on
the
of
the
existing
owners-
and
that
is
not
something
that
translates
if
they
ever
sell-
and
somebody
coming
in
may
decide
to
take
full
advantage
of
whatever
new
zoning
we
place
on
the
property
or
inclusion
that
we
put
on
the
zoning
so
that
we
have
to
remember
and
if
they
stay
then,
as
mr.
maryk
indicated,
we
have
restrictions
on
how
well
we
can
enforce
a
new
provision
that
we
put
on
that.
B
B
You
now
I'll
try
to
keep
a
brief
chair,
I've
gone
back
and
forth
with
staff
with
respect
to
the
integrity
of
our
one
zoning.
We
have
a
zoning
bylaw
that
says
here's
what's
all
one
is
intended
to
do,
and
I
believe
that
approving
this
application
would
diminish
the
integrity
of
that
r1
and
I.
Think
everyone
around
this
table
has
our
one
zoning
in
their
community.
The
thrust
to
rezone
this
property
is
really
the
results
of
experiencing.
B
This
is
the
property
that
the
Royal
Thai
government
owns,
and
so
it's
the
property
that
they
want
to
rezone
to
allow
that
office,
building
use
in
the
r1
and
I.
Don't
believe
that
expediency
is
a
good
planning
grounds
upon
which
to
allow
something
that
is
going
to
diminish
the
integrity
of
our
r1
I.
Think
right
across
the
city.
All
of
us
are
responsive
to
the
homeowners
and
our
ones
who
want
to
preserve
of
their
communities
and
I
think
we'll
be
sending
them
the
wrong
message.
By
approving
this
application,
you
know
it
is.
B
This
is
some
comfort
that
the
need
to
go
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
to
make
the
building
bigger
is
not
there
for
a
couple
of
years,
but
if
they
want
to
add
on
to
the
building
in
something
that
exceeds
what
the
zoning
allows,
they
do
have
that
committee
of
adjustment
week
to
go
down
that
would
not
come
back
before
us.
That
would
presumably
go
to
the
committee
of
adjustment.
B
There
are
other
places
in
this
city
where
we
have
said
very
specifically:
embassies
can
be
built,
and
in
my
ward,
we
have
down
on
Burnside
near
the
Innovation
Center,
an
entire
new
embassy
sector
that
has
been
planned
as
part
of
the
community
design
plan
and
secondary
plan.
I've
started
entertaining
some
discussions
from
potential
and
potential
developers
of
that
land.
There
are
places
in
the
city.
You
can
put
embassies,
it's
not
up
to
us
to
rezone
this
property
in
a
way
that
is
incompatible
with
the
stated
content
of
our
one
zone.
B
When
there
are
alternatives
available
expediency
is
not
a
good
basis
upon
which
to
do.
Land-Use
planning
I
would
ask
my
colleagues
to
reject
this
application,
and
certainly
the
world's
high
government
has
had
my
commitment
on
several
occasions,
as
well
as
at
a
planning
staff
to
help
them
find
a
better
place
to
put
their
office
building
embassy
thanks.
Colleagues.
B
B
B
Did
nothing
wrong?
Madam
chair
I
have
been
considering
it
advice
that
I
have
given
in
the
past
as
a
way
to
make
things
more
practical.
The
chair
will
be
aware,
and
former
members
of
the
committee
will
be
aware,
that
with
planning
applications
where
a
vote
like
this
has
occurred,
you
actually
need
a
to
carry
a
vote.
B
Refusing
the
item
and
I'm
looking
at
the
committee
coordinator
for
her
concurrence,
but
as
long
as
his
item
rises
to
Council,
even
with
no
recommendation
staff
would
work
with
the
award
counselor
to
draft
the
appropriate
motion
at
Council.
So
you
not
immediately
have
to
revote
on
this
item
at
committee.
If
that
is
satisfactory
to
the
chair.
A
A
B
A
Okay,
I
think
that
was
part
of
the
quandary
as
well.
Just
why
would
they
bothering
anyway?
Not
just
me
thinking
out
loud
fixing
them
up
is
2983
and
3053
Navin
Road,
it's
a
zoning,
bylaw
amendment
and
it's
the
first
ads,
the
first
application
for
our
new
counselor
counselor,
Laura,
Judith
and
she's
on
the
Planning
Committee.
So
there
you
go
so
we
have
mr.
Belton
here
representing
staff.
C
Catholic
women's
league
also
is
in
support
of
the
Pope's
initiatives,
save
the
planet.
What
I'm
seeing
up
on
a
personal
level
in
the
Ennis
ward
area
toward
Navin
L,
all
these
shopping
malls,
they
the
banks,
financed
them.
They
don't
lease
it
all
out.
They
are
selling
plastic
goods
produced
in
China
in
India,
which
are
complete
pollutants.
C
There's
a
glut
of
housing
in
those
areas
that
not
just
this
province
of
Ontario,
many
others
where
the
bankers
who
are
often
internationally
funded,
these
billionaires,
don't
even
live
in
Canada
many
are
from
China
in
India
and
they
build
the
stuff,
can't
even
sell
those
properties
can't
lease
those
those
malls.
So
the
new
style
is
you
build
on
existing
structures
or
you
sell
the
existing
units?
C
The
other
thing
is
with
this
oil
and
gas
investment
there
for
a
bar
to
sell
the
gas.
Let's
face
it.
Big
oil
has
often
been
confronted
a
lot
of
it
is
their
European
countries
like
shale
in
things
and
there's
rumors
that
Canada's
selling
Arabic
oil,
so
when
they
build
this
new
bar.
Where
is
this
gas
and
oil
coming
from
you
know?
Recently
in
Toronto
there
was
a
terrible
mall
attack
she's
frankly,
before
the
Kurds
were
having
a
attacked
persons
in
a
Canadian
Tire
in
Toronto.
C
Why
would
I
be
supporting
oil
that
oil
and
gas
people
that
belong
to
Isis
attacks
here
in
Canada
and
abroad
in
the
world?
So
I
really
think
that
for
that
area
they
should
follow
well
carriage
unit
will
care
to
join
ESCO
Act,
which
is
40%
development.
I,
don't
see
to
where
geological
survey
was
consulted
for
when
you're
removing
forested
areas
it's
supposed
to
be
tested
for
the
minerals
and
I,
don't
see
anywhere
in
the
report,
where
they've
been
contacted,
there's
a
federal
level
and
there's
a
provincial
level.
C
The
other
thing
that
concerns
me
about
that
is
the
you
know:
expansion
of
carbon
footprint,
many
other
things
out
there
white-white.
Why
expand
further
I
would
suggest
following
World
Heritage
in
ESCO
Act,
which
is
you
would
leave
60
percent
of
that
forest
there,
if
you
absolutely
had
to
have
it
where
you
walk
to
the
mall
I
saw
the
statement
in
the
press.
C
This
is
why
I'm
here,
where
there's
a
gal
there,
that
wants
to
be
able
to
walk
to
the
mall
well
here
in
the
suburbs,
usually
people
that
live
in
the
suburbs
have
enough
money
to
either
bus
there
or
take
the
car
right.
The
writer
writer
bicoid
paper
taxi
with
the
OC
transport
friendly
expansions.
Yes,
you
had
a
very
serious
crash
in
this
city
less
than
10
days
ago,
and
the
other
thing
that's
showing
up
about
all
this
international
banking
is
the
money's
comes
in
through
the
banking
systems
like
this
Thai
Embassy.
B
C
You
Kim
for
coming
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
the
site-
it's
very.
What
is
your
completely
custom
at,
however,
it
is
right
across
the
street
from
the
mer,
bleue
bog
and
a
lot
a
vast
and
mentally
vast
portion
of
a
green
space.
So,
while
I
don't
disagree
that
you're,
preserving
our
green
space
is
absolutely
essential.
That
particular
site
is
adjacent
to
a
large
expanse
of
that.
So.
B
C
B
A
B
A
In
this
is
the
168
daily,
a
a
veneer
that
by
Sheree
paints,
a
healing
readout,
as
you
saw
councillor
flurry,
came
by
early
on
in
the
meeting
and
confirmed
the
fact
that
he
has
no
problem
with
this.
So
is
this
item
carried
carry
thank
you
and
you
will
follow
up
and
get
more
information.
Okay,
did
you
want
this
copy
of
this
motion
all
right?
B
A
On
February
the
14th-
and
there
will
be
it's
a
notice
of
motion,
so
we
don't
need
to
discuss
that
everybody,
but
this
item
will
be
going
to
that
committee
and
I'm
sure
that
when
you
find
out
which
which
unit
it
is
what
the
address,
what
is
at
the
address
that
you'll
understand
why
this
is
being
initiated,
so
that
will
come
with
the
councilors
report.
Okay,
Kim
sure,
Kevin.
Okay,
thank
you.
Alright!
A
So
any
inquiries,
no
another
business.
We
do
have
some
other
business.
As
you
know,
Jeff.
This
will
be
interesting
to
you.
I
think
I
think
you're
going
to
be
interested.
As
you
know,
the
province
has
an
ongoing
consultation
on
increasing
housing
supply
in
Ontario.
Staff
from
several
departments
have
prepared
a
draft
five
page
technical
staff
response
letter
to
the
province,
responding
to
their
five
questions.
Mr.
Willis
is
going
to
email
that
out
to
the
planning
committee
members
before
the
end
of
the
week.
A
If
you
have
comments,
you
can
send
those
back
to
him
by
early
next
week,
since
we
would
like
to
finalize
this
letter
so
that
council
can
endorse
it
being
sent.
Although
the
deadline
for
comments
is
this
week,
mr.
willis's
already
notified
the
province
that
we
will
be
commenting
and
that
our
comments
will
be
laid
due
to
our
committee
and
council
schedule
following
the
election.
If
members
have
any
questions,
you
can
speak
with
mr.
A
Willis
directly,
okay,
so
that's
the
other
business
and
more
adjourned,
and
the
next
meeting
is
a
is
going
to
be
sort
of
start
off
with
beyond
2036.
It's
really
the
kickoff
of
our
new
official
plan
and
I
hope
you'll
all
come
out
and
be
ready
to
kick
start
that
it's
going
to
be
very,
very
exciting.
It's
very
exciting
to
be
part
of
it.
So
it's
a
Valentine's
Day
meeting
I
will
bring
chocolate
for
you
is
that
what
you're.