►
From YouTube: Planning Committee - February 27, 2018 - Part 2 of 2
Description
Planning Committee meeting – February 27, 2018 – Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
B
I
know
the
the
applicant
is
is
prepared
to
address
that.
There
is
already
provision
in
the
bylaw
at
a
certain
threshold
where
you
can
have
a
certain
number
of
short
stalls.
A
pickup
truck,
for
example,
might
be
difficult
to
fit
into
one
of
these
spots,
but
it
is
anticipated
in
the
Official
Plan
that
sometimes
in
order
to
account
for
some
kind
of
a
public
interest,
some
stalls
can
be
shorter
than
others
in.
B
We
need
to
make
a
couple
of
shallower
parking
spots
in
order
to
take
those
further
away
from
that
baroque
on
the
site.
We'll
have
the
flexibility
to
do
so
in
the
zoning
rather
than
getting
to
site
plan,
seeing
the
potential
to
reduce
the
size
of
some
of
those
Lots
in
order
to
protect
the
tree
and
then
having
to
come
back
for
a
zoning
amendment.
In
order
to
be
able
to
accomplish
that,
so
it
provides
us
the
flexibility
we
need
today.
C
B
A
There's
it
so
on
the
motion
with
regard
to
the
parking
and
the
reduction
in
the
length
of
three
of
the
spaces.
Three
spaces
is
okay.
Thank
you
and
then
on
the
motion
to
move
this
okay
on
the
item
as
amended
carried
and
then
on
the
motion
to
move
it
to
Council
tomorrow,
okay
yeah,
because
the
next
planning
the
next
council
meeting
isn't
for
four
months
from
from
now
yep
yeah.
Okay,
thank
you
everybody.
So
the
next
item
up
is
851
Industrial
Avenue,
it's
a
zoning,
bylaw
amendment
for
diamond
storage
and
we
will
go
away.
A
A
D
You
hello
to
you
all.
My
name
is
Brian
hundreth
and
I'm
here.
As
a
representative
of
the
review
partner,
Association
speak
on
the
application,
like
many
neighborhoods
in
the
city,
River
View
has
been
subject
to
substantial
development
applications
and
recent
years.
In
many
cases,
the
Association
and
the
wider
community
can
perhaps
be
categorized
as
accepting
of,
and
indeed
sometimes
supporting,
of
well
planned
well
executed
developments
which
are
in
keeping
with
the
local
context
of
the
community.
D
Unfortunately,
we
do
not
believe
that
this
application
is
one
of
those
developments,
as
in
general,
we
do
not
believe
it
is
in
keeping
with
sound
planning
objectives
as
they
relate
to
building
height
and
a
new
retail
use.
As
you're
aware
at
planning
rationale
is
provided
with
each
application.
I
would
like
to
read
to
you
as
an
example:
the
proponents
rationale
for
additional
height,
which
applause
for
basically
an
extra
floor
to
a
four-story
maximum,
the
requested
relief
from
the
permitted
height
of
18
years.
D
Twenty
two
point:
three
meters
will
require
amendment
that
should
be
noted
that
the
increase
in
height
is
necessary
to
achieve
the
design
objectives,
product
and
service.
That
is
consistent
with
DOM
and
Management
Limited
and
that's
it.
This
was
the
only
content
provided
by
the
applicant
with
respect
to
rationalizing
the
height
required
for
the
building
when
we
met
with
city
planners
C
planner
and
the
counselor
one
of
our
members,
who
is
in
the
development
industry,
remarked
that
this
was
the
shortest
non
rationality
had
seen
in
25
years
now,
the
retail
rationale
was
equally
weak.
D
The
rationale
is
basically
give
us
more
height
because
we
wanted.
It
is
not
based
on
planning
principles
at
all.
This
lack
of
sound
planning
objectives
was
reiterated
to
the
Community
Association
when
proponent
was
invited
to
and
made
a
presentation
at
our
board
meeting
on
21st
February.
We
asked
the
simple
question:
why
do
you
need
it
at
that?
Meaning
the
response
when
the
proponent
was
in
essence,
because
we
can
sell
it.
D
In
addition,
they
pointed
out
that
they
thought
they
were
entitled
to
a
more
significant
amendment
to
get
9
storeys
for
their
state
if
the
owner
had
wanted
for
those
in
the
know,
with
respect
to
plant
applications.
You
know
this
message
isn't
terribly
shocking,
but
it
is
very
disappointing.
Our
Association
provided
a
city
planner
with
a
four-page
memo
outlining
all
of
the
planning
arguments
we
felt
were
applicable
to
the
application
with
respect
to
the
height
and
retail
uses.
These
were
all
detailed
planning
based
arguments.
D
We
even
included
a
construction
feasibility
analysis
that
supports
a
four-story
building
being
built
on
the
site
with
a
larger
footprint,
which
would
be
less
expensive
from
a
construction
operation
perspective
as
an
economic
advantage
to
the
developer,
while
still
being
the
the
density
objectives.
When
this
application
was
first
brought
to
our
attention,
our
requite
requested
a
context
going
to
show
how
this
property,
as
planned,
compares
to
at
the
nearby
buildings
in
the
community.
You
can
see
it
up
there.
D
What
was
provided
was
an
overlay
of
the
as
of
right
now,
footprint
of
all
the
buildings
in
the
area,
with
the
maximum
permissible
building
envelope
for
each
property
and
the
new
application
shown,
as
proposed
the
idea
being
to
suggest
that
if
every
other
site
in
the
neighborhood
was
built
to
its
maximum
maximum
footprint
and
maximum
height
over
the
next
few
years,
the
proponents
proposal
would
then
be
in
contact.
Frankly.
That
sort
of
demonstrative
argument
is
a
little
ridiculous,
considering
that
most
of
the
newer
buildings
are
less
than
two
storeys.
D
Imagine
what
that
exercise
would
look
like
in
area
full
of
detached
homes
say
like
Hampton,
Park,
Manor,
Park,
Riverside,
Park
or
Carlton
Heights.
You
know,
if
you
told
those
residents,
that's
what
their
subdivision
was
intended
to
look
like,
that
they
probably
throw
a
fit
when
we
talked
about
the
community
changing
over
time.
The
existing
use
of
matters
in
this
case
the
maximum
permissible
use,
is
pretty
extreme
in
the
context
of
the
neighboring
properties.
Asking
for
more
is
truly
excessive.
D
This
proposal
is
bad
planning.
It
defeats
the
purpose
of
restricted
uses
and
building
heights
in
a
local
context.
The
request
was
not
supported
by
any
rationale
and
the
precedent
it
sets
for
future
applications
will
be
detrimental
to
the
future
of
the
local
context
of
the
community.
If
approved,
this
will
essentially
open
the
door
to
excessive
new
heights.
No
doubt
each
larger
than
the
last
for
every
single
new
application.
D
Landowners
will
also
know
that
a
rationale
is
not
required.
You
just
have
to
ask
the
community
is
willing
and
able
to
tolerate
manageable
change,
but
to
make
change
manageable,
it
needs
to
fall
within
the
rules.
This
application
does
not.
We
are
hopeful
that
you
will
support
the
community
and
its
position
and
vote
no
for
both
of
these
zoning
amendments.
Thank
you
very
much
before.
A
D
C
Thank
You
Jared,
thank
you
for
coming
out
this
afternoon.
I
just
I
didn't
have
the
benefit
of
reading
your
for
age
submission.
So
if
I
could
just
ask
very
very
briefly,
what
is
the
adverse
impact
that
your
that
you
would
anticipate
from
the
five-story
building
per
se?
I
understand
you've
got
sort
of
a
larger
policy
rationale
about
arguments
in
favor
of
rezoning,
but
is
there
a
particular
adverse
impact
that
you're
concerned
about?
Should
council
approve
from
18
to
23
metres
the.
D
D
With
that,
that's
that's
really.
The
big
thing
that
you
know
the
the
planning
rationale
is
is
so
poor.
If
that
sets
a
precedence,
then
every
single
other
application
along
industrial
just
has
to
kind
of
ask
those
have
to
be
a
context.
You
know
if
there
was
a
context
provided
by
the
applicant,
then
we
you
know
it
might
be
supportable
and
in
fact
we
provided
a
bunch
of
to
the
city
planner.
D
Adverse
impact
again
is,
is
the
same.
It's
the
cumulative
cumulative
effects
just
because
there
is
a
very
weak
planning
rationale.
We
have
a
really
hard
time
guaranteeing
that
every
new,
every
new
development
that
comes
along
is
going
to
not
just
ask
for
more
amendments
more
moments
without
sound
planning
rationale.
Ok,.
C
The
reason
I'm
asking
a
question
is
I'm.
Looking
at
Google
Maps
and
across
the
street,
there
is
a
mall
I
guess
of
I.
Guess
the
zone
is
light,
industrial
usages,
I,
don't
know
what
but
they're,
essentially
client
oriented
to
consumer
oriented
shops
and
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
as
I.
Listen
what
what
the
substantive
difference
is
between
in
terms
of
the
use
of
that
area
between
a
retail
use
on
the
one
side
of
the
street
and
a
light
industrial
use
which
permits
the
same
type
of
usage
on
the
other
to.
D
E
D
Our
vision
for
industrial
is
basically
what
you
see
there.
As
you
know,
in
the
yellow
and
orange
you
know
we're
prepared
to
tolerate.
Definitely
it's
got
a
lot
of
good
development
opportunities,
but
the
change
has
to
be
manageable.
Going
from
one
story,
buildings
to
six
story,
buildings,
a
story,
buildings,
nine
story,
buildings
is
a
big
change.
We
like
the
current
maximums
of
the
proposed
zoning,
or
rather
we
are
prepared
to
to
be
supportive
of
that
level
of
change,
but
outside
of
be
established,
the
established
only
established
regulations.
E
A
I
worked
there
for
a
lot
of
years.
At
Loeb
is
a
has
a
Senior
Buyer,
so
I
I
know
the
area
very
well.
That's
why
I'm
shocked
actually
at
the
thought
of
impact
to
people
who
live
in
the
homes
on
Coronation
and
over
here
off
of
Russell,
and
that
I,
just
some
surprised,
have
a
hard
time
understanding.
That's
all
anybody
else
have
any
questions
for
mr.
Owen
Drive.
Thank
you,
sir.
Thank.
B
A
B
You
thank
you
for
your
time.
I
will
try
to
be
brief.
First
I
I,
just
I,
want
to
assure
the
committee
and
repair
some
of
the
statements
that
the
false
statements
that
were
made
earlier.
That
rationale
was
not
submitted
and
it
was
a
very
thoughtful
comprehensive
rationale.
They
relied
heavily
on
the
opie
policies
in
terms
of
compatibility
criteria,
two
five
one
and
four
eleven,
and
it
also
relied
heavily
on
the
emerging
direction
of
OPA
180,
which
is
the
city's
employment
lands
review.
B
In
the
absence
of
a
staff
presentation,
and
given
that
I'm
afforded
a
few
more
minutes,
I
will
take
a
step
back.
The
lands
are
designated
employment,
which
is
also
reflected
in
the
property's
existing
zoning,
the
IL
zoning.
It
is
a
unique
employment
area
in
that
it
is
characterized
by
a
municipal
works
yard
associated
with
your
LRT.
That
is
forever
expanding
in
the
city
recently
expropriated
lands
for
for
the
purpose
of
that
yard
that
becomes
important
later.
The
second
larger
defining
element
of
this
corridor
is
the
train
yards
regional
shopping
center.
B
At
an
earlier
time,
this
city
chose
to
amend
some
designations
and
rezone.
The
lands
to
allow
for
a
regional
shopping
center,
which
now
turns
out,
is
in
very
good
proximity
to
LRT.
So
not
necessarily
a
bad
thing.
Part
of
the
issue
with
the
lands
for
your
LRT
is
that
you
consumed
some
of
your
employment
lands.
The
city
in
Opa
one-eighty
concluded
that
this
is
still
a
very
good
employment
area
and,
yes,
characterized
in
part
by
one
two.
Three
and
existing
five-story
buildings.
There's
a
retirement
home
on
it.
B
An
industrial
Avenue
which,
by
coincidence,
when
we
had
a
public
meeting,
was
in
a
five-story
building
on
industrial
Avenue.
Having
said
that,
the
fact
that
the
city
consumes
some
of
those
employment
lands
means
that
you
have
to
get
more
out
of.
What's
left
Diamond
is
proposing
and,
to
be
clear,
the
aisle
zone
allows
for
wells.
The
use
is
permitted
that
sell
storage
use
is
permitted.
We
are
often
in
front
of
this
committee
seeking
to
add
self
storage
to
your
arterial
main
streets
and
your
mixed
view.
B
Centers
and
we'll
do
it
again,
but
in
this
case
here
we
are
actually
already
zoned.
But
what
we're
telling
the
city
is,
we
can
actually
get
a
little
bit
more
into
this
and
value
your
employment
lends
a
little
bit
more.
We
are
generally
meeting
all
of
the
other
zone
provisions,
but
we
want
to
go
a
little
bit
higher
a
self
storage
facility.
B
You
may
recall,
from
other
other
applications,
generates
about
twenty
four
car
trips
a
day,
so
it's
not
a
significant
intensity,
but
what
this
city
concluded
is
that
the
self
storage
use
allows
also
other
properties
to
develop
more
intensely
diamond,
has
boardrooms
meeting
facilities,
all
sorts
of
other
business
services
that
allow
a
very
good
use
of
land
in
the
employment
area.
With
respect
to
the
rationale
that
was
in
in
support
of
this,
the
city
uses
criterias
in
your
Official
Plan
to
decide
if
the
additional
height
is
appropriate
in
terms
of
impacts.
B
There
are
virtually
no
impacts,
there's
no
balconies,
there's
no
windows
associated
with
self
storage.
It
is
not
intrusive,
in
contrast
to
other
types
of
land-uses
in
terms
of
the
visual
impacts
along
Industrial,
it's
going
to
be
set
back,
approximately
24
meters.
We
did
meet
with
the
Community
Association
to
respond
to
their
two
major
concerns.
Higher
and
retail.
B
The
orange
profiles
are
the
existing
buildings
and
we've
noted
the
heights
you'll
notice
that
there
are
30
50
meter
heights
were
requesting
23
meters
for
an
additional
floor
or
cell
storage
separated
from
that
community
by
existing
buildings
that
are
also
zoned,
18
meters,
for
instance,
or
22
meters.
If
you
start
looking
towards
the
north,
the
envelopes
are
maximum
envelopes
there
to
position.
This
committee
has
a
responsibility
to
both
look
at
the
existing
context
and
the
plan
function
and
decide
if
it's
appropriate.
B
The
second
item
is
the
retail
that
now
I'm
going
to
steal
from
bliss
the
retail
component
was
also
raised
by
the
community.
It's
why
we
have
Chris
corn.
Here
it
was
raised
that
it
might
create
an
uncomfortable
amount
of
traffic
on
industrial
Avenue
as
a
four-lane,
divided
arterial,
undivided
arterial,
roadway
intended
to
service
one
of
the
cities,
larger
employment
areas
in
proximity
to
an
interchange.
The
road
is
well
suited
to
accommodate
the
additional
traffic.
The
variance
for
the
height
has
no
real
impacts
in
terms
of
traffic.
B
The
additional
retail
is
recognizing
that
there's
a
regional
shopping
center,
just
a
couple
of
properties
removed
from
this.
There
are
obvious
synergies
between
the
retail
proposed
that
diamond
and
the
retail
at
the
regional
shopping
center,
and,
to
be
perfectly
honest,
it's
it's
in
keeping
with
the
direction
of
OPA
150.
B
Sorry
180
180
says
you
know
what
you
can
introduce
some
accessory
retail
and
it
should
be
in
the
area
of
750
square
meters,
which
is
exactly
what
the
applicant
is
asking
for
and
to
be
honest,
it's
long
overdue
in
that
we
spend
a
lot
of
time
crafting
traditional
Main,
Street
policies
and
arterial,
Main
Street
policies,
and
we
should
be
crafting
policies
just
like
this,
then
make
employment
areas
better
place.
Places
to
work
in
people
shouldn't
have
to
drive
that
far
to
go
to
a
restaurant
or
pick
up
dry
cleaning.
B
That's
exactly
why
this
retail
is
proposed.
So
while
we
met
with
the
Community
Association
and
attempted
to
resolve
their
issues,
I'm
sorry,
but
we
were
not
in
agreement
as
to
the
impacts
to
the
additional
floor,
and
we
disagree
on
the
importance
of
bringing
retail
on
to
Industrial
Avenue.
If
the
community
really
does
want
Industrial
Avenue
to
be
something
better,
this
is
a
good
way
to
start.
So
those
are
my
comments.
A
List,
you
have
anything
to
say
no
I,
think
you
said
everything
Chris
any
comments
on
traffic
or
anything
with
reiated
to
a
diamond.
How
many
diamonds
are
open?
Now
in
Ottawa,
there
are
eight
open
when
the
ninth
Carling
is
under
Lincoln
field
is
under
construction
and
how
many
more
do
you
plan
I,
borrow.
B
A
B
B
Tremblay
mentioned,
we
typically
get
less
than
30
trips
a
day,
which
means
that,
as
we
take
a
look
at
the
peak
hours,
we
might
get
to
three
trips.
So
it
it
really
is
kind
of
a
benign
use
from
a
transportation
point
of
view,
which
is
why,
when
they
are
located
at
intersections
of
arterial
roads,
the
impact
really
is
just
about
access.
It's
not
about
the
additional
car
traffic,
that's
added
to
the
network,
and
so
so,
basically,
that's
that's
the
message
based
on
our
our
proxy
counts
and
our
experience
with
the
sites.
B
A
E
Couch
a
Thank
You
chair
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation
and
Miguel
and
bliss
and
Chris
and
Miguel
and
bliss.
Thank
you
for
meeting
with
the
community
and
myself
last
Wednesday
appreciate
it
very
much
and
just
to
make
the
point
I
think
the
use
of
a
dart,
the
diamond
storage
in
this
location
is
absolutely
appropriate.
There
is
no.
There
is
no
question
about
that.
The
issue
is
with
Miguel
you.
You
talked
about
it,
two
issues,
the
retail
and
the
and
the
height.
So
let
me
start
with
with
the
retail.
If
you
will
and.
E
B
E
B
A
B
A
B
E
You
are
right
and
you
have
an
outstanding
business
model,
I'm
a
client
of
diamond
Don,
Lockley
Road.
There
is
no
retail
there
other
than
the
diamond
proper
and
it's
very
safe
on
on
Walkley
road.
So
I
don't
accept
that
for
safety,
the
retail
is
required
in
that
location,
but
you're
noted,
and
how
many
sites
have
retail
of
your
night.
You
said
nine
in
Ottawa.
E
B
E
A
E
Is
shut
up,
got
it
got
it
and
with
regard
to
the
retail
and
Chris,
perhaps
you
can.
The
transportation
study
was
in
January
2017
in
in
January,
and
it's
it
talks
about
sixty
trips
per
day.
Mr.
Tremblay
talked
about
twenty
four
trips,
the
other
thirty
six,
but
related
to
the
storage
business.
The
other
thirty
six
would
be
related
to
the.
B
B
So
we've
worked
at
generalizing
kind
of
the
impact
and
the
impact
of
of
of
one
of
these
sites
with
retail.
So,
for
example,
we
certainly
use
in
refer
to
the
one
on
Bank
Street,
with
the
sports
store
associated
with
it.
So
at
the
end
of
the
day,
call
it
30
trips,
a
30,
one-way
trips,
meaning
60
in
total
over
24-hour
period
and
what
that
really
means
in
terms
of
what
we
want
to
analyze
being
peak
hour.
Trips
is
down
into
the
five
six
and
that's
for
the
entire
site.
B
Can
I
get
a
comment
related
to
that
in
terms
of
the
synergy
between
the
third
party,
retail,
the
diamond
retail
and
the
diamond
self-storage?
All
of
the
loading
facilities
are
integrated
together,
so
they,
unlike
what
you
see
right
now
on
industrial
Avenue,
where
it's
actually
the
national
grocer,
has
their
loading
fronting
on
to
and
has
a
boats
if
I
have
to
guess
ten
loading
bays
fronting
on
to
Industrial
Avenue.
B
E
A
A
E
An
all
night
you
you,
you
have
about
a
sixty
five
percent
ratio
coverage
on
the
site
and,
and
you
could
go
bigger
other
other
locations-
have
a
lower
profile
and
a
bit
larger
property.
Can
you
have?
Did
you
explore
a
different
design
where
you
could
lower
the
height
to
be
compliant
with
the
current
zoning
and
still
attain
the?
What
you
call
the
the
the
sales
and
design
objectives,
the
sales
objectives
of
the
diamond?
E
B
We
did
we
looked
at
numerous
scenarios,
as
we
always
do
for
diamond,
because
there
are
certain
common
elements
that
I'm
in,
but
generally
they
are
flexible
on
the
building
footprint,
the
area
of
asphalt,
and
we
did
flush
this
out
with
staff
as
well
as
a
function
of
truck
movements
and
everything
else.
So
to
refine
your
comment.
No,
we
we
couldn't
go
any
bigger
on
the
ground
floor
without
exceeding
the
65%,
which
is
the
maximum
percentage
of
building
coverage
in
the
Il
Zone.
B
Nor
would
we
want
to
because
you'll
notice,
at
the
back
of
the
property,
those
hatched
areas
are
a
depressed
loading
area.
So
you
need
certain
amount
of
turn
around.
You
need
fire
lanes.
You
need,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
we're
reducing
some
of
the
dry
vials
to
increase
some
of
the
area
of
the
landscaping
and
abutting
properties
which,
even
though
they're
industrial
properties,
we
can
assume
that
they
will
redevelop
over
time.
B
So
essentially,
the
building
footprint
is
as
large
as
it
should
be
on
the
site
to
achieve
all
of
the
other
design
requirements
and
the
other
functional
requirements.
But
there
is
an
opportunity
here
and
it's
not
as
simple
as
it
was
characterized
earlier.
If
you
have
an
opportunity
to
intensify
industrial
properties,
employment
properties,
to
meet
some
of
your
city's
objectives,
you
should
providing.
There
are
no
impacts
to
that
increase
intensity.
Thank
you,
I.
Just.
A
F
That
is
a
good
thing,
particularly
nasi
really
are
designated
identified
as
key
employment
areas,
unlike
some
other
years,
which
one
who
might
arguably
say,
don't
necessarily
fall
within
that
category.
So
from
from
the
the
employment
land
study,
minor
increases
in
our
opportunities
is
something
that's
very
much
aligned
with
with
what
was
anticipated
and
expected.
C
Thanks
very
much
in
entirely
on
solution
than
just
listening
to
the
presenter
I.
Think
one
of
the
fears
is
about
I.
Don't
actually
think
the
fears
right,
I
think
the
fear
is
about
how
what
this
might
do
in
terms
of
leading
to
further
redevelopments
down
the
road
and
wanting
to
avoid
turning
industrial
into
a
hunk,
lowborn,
Ennis
Road
or
a
mayor
Bell,
or
something
like
that
and
so
I'm
wondering
and
the
diamond
in
noir
lanes
is
great.
The
Ennis
Rhodes
beautiful
building
I've
got
a
sports
store
on
on
the
first
floor,
which
is
great.
C
The
one
thing
I
don't
like
about
the
in
his
Road
building
and
I,
see
it
reflected
in
your
site
plan
is
the
two
stacks
of
parking
between
the
sidewalk
and
the
frontage
of
the
building
and
I'm
wondering
to
alleviate
the
concern
raised
by
the
councillor
and
the
neighbor.
Could
you
bring
the
building
closer
to
the
sidewalk
to
create
that
pedestrian,
friendly
environment?
I?
Can't
remember
your
name
I'm,
sorry,
madam,
but
that
list
that
you
were
speaking
of
earlier
and
relocate
the
parking
to
other
portions
of
the
property
and
that
might
help
avoid
that
awkward.
C
That
we
see
on
some
of
our
arterial
commercial
streets.
That
is
really
what
draws
people
away
from
you
know.
No
one
walks
on
in
this
road,
I
dare
very
much
people
walk
on,
hung,
Club
and
I.
Doubt
people
will
walk
on
industrial.
If
the
building
is
actually
closer
for
the
sidewalk,
then
perhaps
perhaps
they
might
actually
start
to
do
that
so
not
reduce
the
part.
You
know,
maybe
you
can
lose
a
couple
but
bring
the
building
to
the
front
and
relocate
the
park
in
other
spots.
B
Maybe
I
can
start
and
Chris
will
speak
to
maybe
a
little
bit
more
of
the
technical
constraints.
Having
done
quite
a
few
of
these,
there
are
positional
issues
related
building
and
in
particular
the
the
drive-thru
component,
which
is
oriented
always
towards
the
arterial
and
there's
certain
minimum
setbacks
so
that
there's
an
adequate
throat
length
between
the
via
Baca,
curb
and
the
front
of
the
building.
So
there's
no
cueing
potential
on
the
ID
on
the
arterial.
We
did
look
at
various
scenarios.
B
That's
not
to
say
that
Industrial
Avenue
is
is
less
important
than
other
streets,
but
it's
it's
certainly
a
different
function
than
carling
avenue
or
in
its
road
that
has
certain
additional
design
expectations.
What
we've
done
here
is
actually
almost
identical.
Treatment
to
the
1840
walk
the
road
where
it
is
double
loaded,
which
is
the
one
that
the
counselors
most
familiar
with,
is
still
double
loaded
parking,
but
supplemented
with
landscaping.
B
B
Don't
know
if
you
want
to
elaborate
a
little
bit
more,
but
the
throat
links
that
the
city
wants
and
to
be
honest
parking
in
reasonable
proximity
to
that
front,
facing
retail
so
just
to
to
quickly
add
to
the
chairs.
Is
that
when
we
are
designing
the
sites
and
helping
with
that,
we
we
do
pay
particular
attention
to
the
private,
but
also
the
the
tack
guidelines
and
in
our
design.
Vehicle
in
fact,
is
what
we
call
the
WB
20,
which
is
a
tractor-trailer,
while
only
one.
B
Every
two
weeks
is
what
is
what
arrives
at
a
diamond
self-storage
on
average,
we
still
have
to
make
sure
that
that
vehicle
can
travel
through
the
site.
So
when
we
combine
all
of
those
elements
together,
this
tends
to
be
the
the
arrangement
that
works
best
and
also
considering
things
like
accessibility
and
proximity
of
things
like
accessible
parking
spaces
to
the
front
doors
of
the
site.
So
it
it
again
when
we
we
compound
all
of
those
those
needs.
This
tends
to
be
the
the
arrangement
that
works
out
best
for
us
sure.
C
I
guess
where
there's
a
will
there's
a
way
and
if
you're
applying
for
an
amendment
to
the
zoning
bylaw,
you
can
apply
for
variances
to
the
private
approached
by
law
or
other
restrictions
that
might
apply.
I.
Think
it's
just
all
in
what
you
want
to
do.
I
know
the
innistrad
one.
The
door
to
the
retail
is
actually
on
the
side
of
the
building
is
not
on
the
frontage
of
the
building.
A
Well,
they
have
a
lot
of
businesses
here
and
I
think
they're
not
all
the
same,
but
they
all
have
a
certain
look
to
the
right.
They
all
have
the
windows
that
look
at
their
window
dressings.
They
have
commonality
amongst
them
all,
but
they're.
It's
like
the
Catholic
school
board,
but
used
to
be
trusty,
for
they
use
the
same
plan,
but
every
one
of
them
really
looks
different.
B
A
B
F
B
F
Have
a
report
that's
going
to
be
coming
for
those
can
be
dealing
with
some
light
industrial
type
uses
that
would
be
permitted
along
Main
streets,
okay,
they
would
prevent
this
right
and
then
well.
This
isn't
a
main
street
by
the
guy
I.
Don't
it
could
be
something
that
could
be
included
on
Main
streets?
We
have
a
conclude
of
that,
but
that
is
report
that
will
be
coming
forward.
F
F
B
F
A
report,
so
this
type
of
facility
is
in
fact
permitted
in
industrial
zones
today,
what's
being
asked
for
in
this
instance,
is
a
small
retail
which
is
also
allowed
for
within
the
framework
of
the
Official
Plan,
and
we
have
a
consistency,
implementation
that
we
will
be
doing
once
we
get
final
approval
of
OPA,
one
180
through
the
OMB
process.
So
ultimately
the.
F
F
Again,
we're
not
at
the
point
yet
without
moving
forward
on
the
changes
to
the
industrial
zone
and
up
flow
from
OPA
180,
because
we
have
not
yet
received
the
final
decision
on
OPA
180
and
that's
a
process
that
we
have
got
to
go
through
as
far
as
the
light
industrial
on
arterial
and
traditional
main
streets.
That's
something
we're
very
much
in
process
with
and
the
expectation
is.
A
report
will
be
coming
forward
within
the
next
couple
of
months
on
that.
Okay,
thanks.
E
Thank
you
chair
questions
for
staff
message.
I
shall
miss
it
about
special
PD
in
your
corner.
You
just
two
questions
with
regard
to
the
retail.
On
page
five
of
the
report,
you
you
talk
about
OPA,
180
policy,
three
point,
six
point,
five
point
two
and
it
enumerates
some
uses
and
but
it's
pretty
broad
category
retail
is
not
one
of
those
uses.
Why
are
you
referring
to
and
they're
asking
for
retail?
Why
did
you
use
that
policy
to
justify
this?
Madam.
B
Chair,
while
retail
use
is
not
specifically
listed
in
the
OPP
OPP
also
does
not
specifically
precluded.
Staff
still
meets.
F
feels
that
the
intent
of
the
OPA
is
being
met
by
being
supportive
of
the
employment
area,
similar
to
other
uses
that
are
listed,
such
as
convenience
stores,
restaurant
coffee
shops
or
similar.
E
Uses
but
is
weak,
is
retail
not
an
enumerated
section
or
segment?
Is
there
not
a
segment,
a
policy
that
talks
about
retail
that
you
could
have
referred
to
since
the
proponent
is
asking
for
retail?
They
are
not
asking
for
drugstores
or
coffee
shops.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
they
don't
want
restaurants,
so
they
said
and
and
I
absolutely
believe
that-
and
could
you
not
have
referred
to
retail
in
your
report,
not.
B
E
G
E
Your
question:
what
I'd
like
is
the
assurances
in
in
what
we
are
approving,
that
it
will
not
be
a
restaurant
in
what
might
be
approved
by
this
committee
that
it
will
not
be
a
restaurant,
because
it
is
not
the
intention
of
Dimon
to
have
a
restaurant
or
a
coffee
shop.
But
they
have
consistently
spoken
of
the
dry-goods
and
and
the
sporting-goods.
A
E
B
E
A
F
F
Madam
chair,
that
the
current
zoning
does
not
allow
a
retail
use
at
this
location.
The
official
plan
sets
out
for
the
policies
in
the
nature
of
uses
that
would
be
considered
appropriate
within
an
employment
area
and
identifies
a
small
scale
non
industrial
uses
and
some
of
those
are
identified
in
the
report
as
being
within
the
scope
of
what
could
be
considered
reasonable
within
an
industrial
area.
So
that's
a
policy
in
the
Official
Plan
that
palsy
does
not
make
specific
weapons
to
retail
either
saying
yes
or
no.
We
are
dealing
with
a
rezoning.
F
I
think
when
mr.
Herr
wire
is
indicating
is
that
the
assessment
of
that
retail
was
within
the
framework
of
the
Official
Plan
policies
that
allows
for
non
non-employment
type
uses
and
Silveri
type
uses
to
exist
within
industrial
zones
where
they
don't
diminish
or
take
away
from
the
opportunities
for
employment
potential
to
be
realized
and
to
allow
for
some
support
uses
to
be
provided
within
those
areas,
and
in
this
instance
the
retail
is
specifically
being
added
to
the
zoning
to
allow
for
that
type
of
activity
to
occur
on
this
property,
and
that's
it.
E
F
E
Just
one
last
question
to
staff
and
a
pretty
broad
statement
at
the
top
of
page
five,
the
requested
zoning
bylaw
amendment
seeks
to
address
various
zoning
provisions
in
order
to
support
the
development
of
the
site
as
a
self-storage
business
josh'll.
If
you
could
elaborate
on
that,
because
the
retail
being
asked
for
is
said
to
be
ancillary,
but
bliss
has
said
that
it
is
not
required
as
part
of
the
Self
Storage
business.
E
B
So
that's
referring
to
various
zone
provisions
being
amended
to
support
the
self
storage
and
that
wasn't
effective.
That
was
read
to
indicate
that
the
retail
is
required
to
support
the
self-service
storage
business.
That's
not
the
intent!
If
you
go
to
the
details
of
the
zone
leaders,
various
relief
in
terms
of
setbacks,
aisle
widths
loading,
that's
what
that
whole
section
is
about
height
and
retail.
Ok,
that
does
not
pertain
to
that
issue.
It's
it's
the
zone,
provision,
setbacks
and
so
on.
Ok,.
E
B
E
A
A
E
First,
motion
and
I
believe
it's
been
circulated
melody.
Is
it
constructed
or
should
I
read
it,
whereas
the
proposed
building
height
is
twenty
three
meters
and
whereas
the
proposed
building
is
considerably
taller
than
the
existing
one,
one
and
two-story
buildings
immediately
surrounding
the
site
and
whereas
the
desired
height
is
eighteen
meters
therefore
be
resolved
at
the
height
of
the
building,
be
limited
to
18
meters
and
be
further
resolved
that
there
be
no
further
notice
pursuant
to
subsection
34:17
of
the
Planning
Act.
For
me
to
do
the
second
motion
now
sure.
A
A
So
in
that
case,
mr.
marks,
are
you
still
there?
I
am
manager,
okay,
so
that
does
that
make
the
separation
of
the
vote
on
the
retail
go
first,
because
wouldn't
the
height
be
impacted
by
the
taking
away
of
the
retail,
because
currently
on
the
bottom
floor
is
not
worth
stuff
as
stored.
It
is
where
people
drive
in
and
and
pick
up
boxes,
maybe
and
all
that
retail
stuff
that
they
do
right
now
right
is.
You
do
have
a
retail
component
right
now,
so
my
question
is:
what's
the
order,
madam.
B
Chair
it
seemed
to
me,
but
of
course
the
chair
will
have
the
final
determination
that
it
made
sense
that
the
height
motion
would
go
first,
because
that
would
affect
the
second
motion
in
its
cloth.
Again.
I
don't
have
the
motions
in
front
of
me
but
as
I
recall,
the
first
Clause
and
the
second
motion
deals
with
height,
and
so
it
would
effectively
be
amended
by
the
first
motion.
Madam
chair,
all.
A
Right
so
we're
going
with
the
height
first,
the
first
one
is
to
reduce
the
height
from
23
meters
to
18
meters,
so
on
the
reverse
councillor
kocha
has
asked
for
yeas
and
nays
Kelsey
bleh
councillor
brockington,
no
as
a
shoe
alley.
Councillor
clue
chain.
Yes,
Kelsey
leaper
concern
this
bun,
no,
because
you're
catering
no
place
chair
Channing,
no
and
myself.
No!
So
now
we'll
separate
we'll
set
that
as
one
to
72.
So
on
the
next
motion,
we
will
vote
on
whether
there
should
be
a
retail
use
permit
it
does
that
make
sense.
A
C
A
I'm
not
that
deep
today,
yes,
I,
can
promise
you
after
today
I'm
not
that
deep,
yes,
dear
I,
am
what
sort
of
double
negative
cancer
Brockington
to
allow
retail
at
that
location.
Yes,
councillor,
shrilling
councillor
clue
chain
know
cancer
kills
early
/,
yes,
cancer.
This
bum!
Yes,
councillor
cadre!
Yes,
vice-chair
Channing!
Yes,
myself!
Yes!
A
A
F
B
A
G
A
G
G
Natural
heritage
designation,
put
on
their
property
as
it
is
unconstitutional
and
goes
against
our
rights
as
private
property
owners
own
enjoy
and
prosper
as
we
see
fit.
That
is
an
expo
pre,
a
chemise
control
of
and
a
limitation
to
the
right
to
use
and
the
right
to
the
enjoyment
of
our
property
without
compensation.
G
We
have
owned
our
10
acre
general
property
for
forty-eight
years
and
are
sick
and
tired
of
municipal
government
interference
into
our
lives
over
our
property,
which
we
owned
outright.
We
have
a
crown
land
grant
of
1824
and
a
clean
title
deed
in
our
names.
Only
a
first
issue
was
in
1970.
We
moved
to
sixty
but
twelve
mobile
home
onto
our
property,
with
an
old
trailer
bylaw
coming
in
or
in
the
air
by
the
township.
Our
second
problem
was
in
73.
G
We
want
to
replace
our
trailer
with
a
house
glue,
burned,
Township
said:
I
must
be
a
farmer
before
they
issued
me.
The
building
permit
defeated
in
1987
I,
had
a
petition
created
to
have
the
observable
drain
extension
could
truck
constructed
to
provide
outlet
for
water
directed
to
our
area,
causing
flooding.
G
My
neighbors
and
I
spent
big
money
to
get
rid
of
other
people's
water.
We
did
the
township
job
for
them.
Drainage
here
is
another
issue
still
being
abused
in
1996
America
actual
reserve
designation
was
put
on
their
properties,
dan
page
and
Andrew
hope
official
planners
for
the
township
and
the
region
said
it
was
a
done.
Deal.
Aggregate
was
needed
for
the
expansion
highway,
7
I
told
them
they
should
have
included
the
aggregate
orders
to
their
behind
closed
door
meetings
and
over
my
dead
body,
where
they
have.
G
My
land
I
took
Carol
Christensen
for
a
ride
around
the
mxr
intended
bark.
Her
words
were:
oh,
my
god,
the
official
planners
haven't
done
their
homework.
They're
people
living
out
here,
two
and
a
half
years
later,
the
exercise
was
defeated
at
111,
misery,
Street
and
from
the
Regional
Council.
At
that
time
there
was
no
natural
heritage
features
worth
saving.
G
There
is
even
less
now.
Trees
are
all
die,
an
ash
trees
in
2005
by
battle
a
crop
prevention,
PSW
professionally
significant,
well
land
designation,
initiated
by
the
City
of
Ottawa
on
our
property.
The
cost
was
enormous:
three
years
of
lost
sleep,
depression,
anxiety,
stress,
causing
me
a
heart
attack
all
this
for
biodiversity,
offset
cut
and
fill.
They
wish
to
designate
our
properties
to
replace
real
provincially,
significant
ones
given
to
developers
in
the
area
that
is
your
Browns
independent,
grocer,
Tim,
Hortons,
Jackson
trails,
etc.
G
Biologists
report,
M&R
told
the
city
to
remove
the
PSW
designation
from
the
official
plan
in
2016.
A
stormwater
runoff
tax
I,
attended
four
meetings
and
spoken
from
the
Environment
Committee
at
City.
Hall
stating
I
have
no
stormwater
runoff
into
city
ditches,
city
water
runs
on
web
properties
in
the
spring
Rob
we
already
paid
from
municipal
drain.
So
this
is
double
dipping
by
the
city.
We
still
have
drainage
problems
in
our
area.
G
No
adequate
outlets,
Municipal
Act,
a
single
10-11
to
paragraph
a
for
a
single
tier
municipality,
may
pass
by
laws
respecting
following
matters:
public
assets
of
the
musicality
acquired
for
the
purpose
of
exercising
its
authority
under
this
or
any
other
act
to
kenny
township
council
Michael,
Pollan
and
Graydon
Ebert
from
geldings
wld
law.
Firm,
formerly
gelding,
Lafleur
Henderson
municipalities
are
placing
strict
regulations
of
development,
prohibition
of
uses
in
official
plans
and
states
that
these
measures
are
beyond
the
legal
authority.
G
Municipalities,
municipalities
have
used
or
that
have
used
or
continue
to
use
their
official
plans
to
regulate
or
prohibit
specific
land
users
should
discontinue
this
planning
policy
approach.
It
is
clear
that
the
law,
both
the
decided
case
law
and
the
Planning
Act,
does
not
give
us
apology
authority
to
use
your
official
plans
for
the
purpose
and
not
doing
so
constitutes
a
bridge
too
far
in
the
use
of
official
plans.
G
G
A
G
A
G
You
very
much
Sharon,
just
a
question
back
to
the
delegation.
Do
you
mentioned
in
your
last
taper
something
with
criminal
activity
or
criminal?
That's
a
stuff
I've
derived
from
self
research
that
I've
got
that
it's
it.
The
city
is
how
the
city
they
don't
have
that
you
don't
have
the
authority
nor
the
jurisdiction
to
make
rules
and
regulations
on
my
land
without
my
consent,.
B
Madam
chair
I
have
in
front
of
me
a
decision
of
the
Interior
Superior
Court
dealing
with
this
argument,
and
so,
if
I
may
read
two
paragraphs,
sure
I
do
not
agree
with
the
applicants,
interpretation
of
powers
of
a
municipality
or
the
significance
of
a
crown
patent.
The
crown
patent
is
an
instrument
by
which
land
is
conveyed
by
the
crown
to
a
private,
individual
or
members
of
the
public.
Crown
patents
are
found
all
over
the
province
of
Ontario.
B
A
You
can't
okay,
thank
you.
I
try
to
be
the
only
way.
I
can
keep
any
kind
of
any
kind
of
normalcy
around.
Here
is
by
sticking
to
the
same
rules,
and
it's
not
easy
on
any
day
really.
I
don't
have
that
to
hang
my
hat
on
I,
don't
know
where
I
go:
Paul
Joanna's
from
green
space,
Alliance
and
then
my
town
and
then
Sheila
Perry
and
all
of
you
I
know
know
that
you
have
five
minutes.
B
We
worked
closely
with
stakeholders
and
engaging
with
city
staff
over
the
process
of
crafting
this
bylaw
staff
report
makes
this
makes
reference
to
this
and
also
characterizes
our
position
on
the
outcome,
but
I'd
like
to
make
following
submissions
regarding
the
draft
submitted
for
consideration
by
Planning
Committee.
So
first
we're
happy
to
see
in
strongly
support
that
there
is
a
site
alteration
bylaw,
we're
happy
that
the
bylaw
covers
both
rural
and
urban
side
alterations
and
especially
that
it
covers
vegetation
removal
as
a
type
of
site
alteration
to
be
covered
by
the
restrictions
of
the
bylaw.
B
With
the
provisions
of
the
bylaw
on
the
down
side,
we
would
have
preferred
to
see
the
byline
forced
to
a
permit
system
rather
than
the
complaint
procedure.
We
understand
that
a
permit
system
might
be
more
onerous
and
especially
in
rural
areas,
it's
a
unknown
effectiveness.
Really,
however,
we
would
be
the
only
municipality
in
Ontario
with
the
sighted
alteration
bylaw.
That
does
not
include
a
permit
system,
so
kind
of
stands
out
from
the
rest
of
the
practice
in
the
province
and
that's
not
possible
to
introduce
a
permit
system.
B
Perhaps
a
minimal
form
of
prior
reporting
could
be
introduced,
sort
of
as
an
adjunct
to
the
complaint
procedure,
so
we
would
propose
that
a
minimum
the
bylaw
require
that
the
ward
ounce
will
be
notified
of
any
intended
side
alteration,
meaning
the
bylaw
definition.
This
would
at
least
raise
the
flag
ahead
of
time
and
not
place
the
entire
burden
of
enforcement
on
post
hoc
complaints
reported
to
the
city
by
the
3-1-1
number.
So
that's
our
first
point
second
point
from
the
green
space
perspective.
Our
interest
is
mostly
preventing
unnecessary
vegetation
removal
and,
in
particular,
wooded
areas.
B
Woodlands
trees
in
this
respect
will
please
deceive
and
another
point
one
of
the
bylaw
that
aside
alterations
that
are
in
the
proximity
of
sensitive
environmental
areas,
will
require
prior
approval
of
the
general
manager,
planning,
infrastructure
and
economic
development.
However,
you
question
whether
the
proposed
distance
of
the
site
alteration
to
the
significant
to
be
significant
environmental
area
of
30
meters
is
sufficient.
B
We
note
that
in
cinema
policies
in
the
Official
Plan,
the
limit
is
said
is
at
120
metres
in
the
case
of
site,
alterations
in
the
proximity
of
significant
wetlands
and
also
at
120
metres,
with
respect
to
set
alterations
and
development
in
proximity
to
natural
environment
areas.
So
we
believe
that
the
provision
of
the
site,
alteration
by
law
should
be
consistent
with
the
Official
Plan
policies
in
this
regard
and
propose
that
the
distance
be
changed
from
30
metres
220
metres.
B
The
third
point
we
made
deals
with
the
coverage
of
the
south
alteration
bylaw,
as
currently
drafted.
It
doesn't
cover
a
type
of
vegetation
renewal
that
is
one
of
our
highest
concerns
and
that's
the
pre-emptive
cutting
of
rural
trees
and
woodlands
ahead
of
urban
expansions.
This
is
a
kind
of
problem
we've
seen
prop
up
before,
where
there's
a
potential
of
an
expansion,
landowners,
clear
the
land
to
make
the
property
more
attractive
for
development
and
then
preserve
subsequent
loss
of
green
space
and
wood,
Lots
and
woodlands,
so
that
we
found
with
the
current
width
by
austerity
drafted.
B
Vegetation
removal
in
the
close
peri-urban
area,
so
we
are
concerned
about
the
far
rural
areas
which
is
concerned
about
that
area
that
is
immediately
adjacent
to
the
urban
boundary,
so
all
of
those
Lots
that
are
really,
in
a
sense,
the
rural,
but
at
the
same
time
we
all
know
that
one
day
they'll
be
urban,
any
future
expansion.
These
are
the
first
lots
that
are
likely
to
be
brought
in
right
now,
unless
the
woodland
area
in
this
crown
of
land
is
considered
already
in
the
national
heritage
system
of
the
city
as
significant.
B
That
would
become
it
protected
by
the
by
this
bylaw
the
way
they're
distracted,
but
that's
only
really
major
pieces
of
green
space.
There
are
any
number
of
smaller
wood
Lots
wooded
areas
that
would
sort
of
fall
through
the
filter
and
not
be
covered
by
anything
right
now,
not
by
the
urban
tree
conservation
by
law
at
that
semi-urban,
not
by
the
significant
woodland
policy
Lee
Sofia
approved,
because
that
deals
really
explicitly
with
urban
expansion
areas,
those
that
are
already
identified
as
future
urban
expansions
and
not
by
the
site-
alteration
bylaw
as
currently
drafted.
B
B
Paul
I
think
you've
been
heavily
involved
in
need.
The
creation
of
this
bylaw
there's
been
a
lot
of
consultations.
Do
you
have
any
indication
of
why
the
bylaw
would
set
out
a
30
meter
distance
from
those
site,
those
sensitive
areas
versus
120
metres
of
Sydney
okey
I?
Don't
have
a
lot
of
insight
into
that
particular
question.
I
have
a
degree
didn't
come
up
in
our
discussions.
B
Previous
I
had
just
a
few
words
before
the
meeting
today,
but
I
think
staff
had
be
in
a
better
position
to
respond
to
that
than
I
would
okay
and
then,
with
respect
to
the
pre-emptive
clearing
of
woodlots
in
those
I,
think
all
them
peri-urban
areas.
Those
are
immediately
adjacent
to
the
urban
boundary.
Is
that
a
real
problem,
yeah
I
think
there
are.
There
are
specific
examples
of
this
type
of
situation
has
occurred
in
a
head
of
OPA
76
in
2009-2010.
B
It's
in
fact
a
problem
that
was
already
identified
in
the
significant
woodland
policy
work
and
when
council
approved
the
significant
winland
policy
last
year.
It
also
directed
staff
to
set
up
a
working
group
to
deal
with
the
implementation
provisions
of
that
policy,
including
the
treatment
of
pre-emptive
clearing
incident
in
the
Perry
urban
area.
B
The
reason
I
bring
it
up
today
is
that
the
work
in
networking
remember
that
workgroup
at
this
point
seems
to
defer
to
the
side
operation
by
law,
but
if
we
only
rely
on
the
side
alteration
by
law,
it
won't
cover
these
smaller
wood
Lots.
That
would
not
be
covered
that
aren't
currently
part
of
the
natural
heritage
system.
So
there's
a
there
is
a
gap
that
you
feel
we
still
have
work
to
do
to
cover.
Yes,
thanks:
okay.
A
Thank
you
just
off
the
top
of
my
thank
you
very
much
mr.
Janus,
mr.
Smith
I'm
in
maritime,
but
I
know
where
the
hole
would
be
okay,
one
of
the
questions,
one
of
the
concerns
that
mr.
DeAnda
said
was
specifically
to
the
land
immediately
around
a
suburban
community,
but
in
the
last,
in
the
last
few
years,
we've
approved
the
woodlot,
the
wildlife
site,
altercation
tree
preservation,
I'm
missing
a
couple
plus
plus
some
things
specific
to
the
wetlands.
I
mean
there
are.
F
F
One
of
the
key
things
that
council
approved
last
year
was
here
in
forest
management
plan
and
one
of
the
things
that
flowed
from
that
we've
identified
that
as
an
item
to
do
this
year,
initiated
work
this
year
is
a
review
of
the
urban
tree
conservation
bylaw,
which
is
ongoing
and
if
there's
a
void
or
a
gap
or
a
hole.
It's
within
the
framework
of
that
review
that
we
would
be
looking
to
to
address.
We
don't
really
see
the
need
in
terms
of
this
current
site
alteration
bylaw,
and
we
definitely
recognize
that.
F
A
F
Never
had
a
permit
for
site
alteration.
Well,
we
never
had
the
operation
bylaw.
We
had
variations
of
forms
of
site
alterations
for
the
topsoil
removal
that
was
part
for
municipalities
to
drange
bylaw,
which
is
an
element
of
a
site.
Alteration
moving
into
the
permit
process
is
incredibly
intensive
exercise
to
go
through
the
experiences
that
we've
had
in
site.
Alteration
is,
generally
speaking,
these
things
these
are
being
undertaken
in
a
responsible
manner.
There
are
some
situations
where
we
do
have
some
issues
that
we
encounter
from
time
and.
A
F
Are
taken,
if
there's
other
initiatives
that
we
can
pet,
that
we
can
pursue
our
corrective
measures
or
prosecutions
under
whatever
legislations
might
be
available,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
this
is
really
to
set
a
stage
to
identify
best
practices
and
accepted
standards.
It's
not
to
penalize
it's
to
say.
This
is
what
the
expectations
are
when
you
undertake
a
side
operation
as
we're,
really
within
that
framework
that
we
don't
see
the
need
to
move
down
a
path
of
a
permit
process,
but.
F
Typically,
site
alteration
really
the
biologically
focused
round
activities
that
occur
outside
of
the
normal
development
review
process.
If
we're
into
a
developer
review
process,
all
these
issues
are
comprehensively
looked
at
at
that
time.
So
this
is
really
those
situations
where
things
might
be
occurring
outside
of
a
formal
application
or.
A
C
Gesture
I
guess
a
question
for
mr.
McPherson
just
following
up
from
mr.
Uranus's
intervention.
So
first
on
the
third
point
he
made
so
he's
not
necessarily
arguing
that
the
site
alteration
bylaw
should
be
the
place.
But
is
it
true
that
currently
for
a
woodlot,
less
than
point
8
hectares
on
the
edge
of
the
ordinary,
but
not
in
the
urban
area,
we
don't
have
a
regime
to
control
the
demolition
of
that
with
lauder
the
destruction
of
that
woodlot.
If
it's
less
than
point
8
hectare.
A
Through
you,
madam
chair,
the
peri-urban
woodlands
that
mr.
johannes
refers
to
if
they
are
already
identified
as
part
of
the
city's
natural
heritage
system
in
some
way
shape
or
form
if
they
are
associated,
for
example,
with
a
significant
Valley
land
or
if
they
form
an
identified
linkage,
feature
and
and
therefore
appear
on
the
schedules.
Then
they
would
be
protected
under
the
command
bylaw.
It's
not
really
a
matter
of
the
size
of
the
woodlot.
In
that
case,
certainly,
however,
the
the
urban
significance
criteria
for
for
significant
Woodlands
is
somewhat
size
dependent,
so
I
believe
mr.
A
C
A
Concur
with
my
manager,
mr.
Schmitt,
in
saying
that
that
is
something
that
we
could
look
at
through
the
upcoming
urban
tree
conservation
by
law
review
it
previously.
That
bylaw
was
amended
to
include
designated
urban
expansion
areas
and
it
seems
a
reasonable
Avenue
to
pursue
and
to
consult
the
city,
the
public,
on
the
possibility
of
expanding,
to
look
at
things
just
behind
that
boundary.
A
C
C
C
Well,
the
specific
issue
that
mr.
yuan
is
read
about
the
pair
of
the
pair
urban
problem,
so
it
doesn't
sound
like
it
sounds
like
there
may
be
a
lacuna,
we're
not
going
to
argue
it
here
in
the
context
of
the
work
you're
doing
on
the
significant
woodlands
policy
and
the
urban
tree
bylaw
work
which
I
understand
is
taking
place
this
spring
we
may.
If
there
is
a
gap,
then
that
would
be
the
appropriate
place
to
take
that
on
correct.
That's.
F
C
Great,
my
second
question
is
relating
to
the
bylaw
itself.
Under
the
interpretive
clauses,
three
nine.
It
says
that
the
Bible
applies
to
all
lands
within
the
geographic
limit
to
the
City
of
Ottawa
other
than
those
areas
which
are
subject
to
regulations
made
under
section
28,
one
of
the
conservation
authorities
Act.
C
And
if
you
can
answer
this
question
now,
I'm
happy
to
have
the
answer
later,
but
is
staff
confident
that
all
of
the
areas
that
the
Official
Plan
anticipated
as
being
covered
under
the
120
meter
rule?
Are
there
currently
regulations
under
the
conservation
authorities
Act
that
capture
those
areas
because
section
21
of
a
conservation
authorities
Act
allows
the
conservation
authority
to
establish
regulations
pertaining
to
specific
land
areas
and
I.
C
Just
don't
know:
I
don't
have
the
knowledge
to
know
whether
or
not
that
map's
exactly
with
the
areas
that
the
Official
Plan
in
setting
the
120
meter
policy,
safe
or
significant
wetlands
do
we
know
that
there
are
regs
under
the
conservation
authorities
Act.
That
would
mean
that
this
provision
of
the
interpretive
Clause
applies
to
them.
A
I
it
is
my
understanding
that
there
are
some
updates
to
the
regulations,
mapping
currently
underway,
given
the
recent
change,
for
example,
in
the
Mississippi
Valley
Conservation
Authority's
position
on
unevaluated
wetlands.
Those
areas
will
also
be
taken
under
their
jurisdiction
shortly
and
are
well.
They
actually
have
taken
jurisdiction
over
them,
but
the
mapping
has
yet
to
be
fully
communicated
to
our
staff
and
posted
on
our
website,
so
that
takes
a
very
great
amount
of
land.
A
That's
considered
part
of
the
city's
natural
heritage
system
out
of
our
jurisdiction
under
this
bylaw
as
to
whether
it
includes
all
of
the
limbs
that
would
currently
be
captured.
You
mentioned
120
meters
and
I
know
you
and
I
had
discussed
previously
how
the
Official
Plan
does
refer
to
an
adjacency
triggered
distance
to
require
an
environmental
impact,
seaman
for
development
or
site
alteration
within
120
metres
of
a
number
of
different
natural
features.
A
The
decisions
made
early
on
in
the
process
of
developing
this
by
law
to
scope
the
application
of
that
requirement
in
the
bylaw,
which
is
under
the
municipal
Act
and
not
under
the
Planning
Act,
that
we
would
only
look
at
requiring
environmental
impact
statements
for
work
within
30
meters
of
natural
heritage
features
and
designated
environmental
areas.
That
decision
was
made
for
a
number
of
reasons,
primarily
because
works
done
outside
of
the
30
meters
often
have
a
little
impact
on
a
future.
A
The
distance,
the
intervening
distance
is
usually
sufficient
to
ensure
that
the
impacts
we
of
course
continue
to
review
development
applications
within
120
metres
of
those
features
as
specified
in
the
Official
Plan
policies.
In
a
number
of
cases,
though,
if
the
development
is
of
a
minor
nature,
the
environmental
impact
statement
may
be
waived
by
staff
in
those
cases.
Okay,
so
thank
you.
Thank
you,
Amy
yeah
I
did
we
have
couple
more
speakers
so
before
you
ask
more
question.
C
G
G
Think
that
staff
have
done
an
excellent
job
of
what
I
would
call
finding
the
middle
ground
between
doing
nothing
which
might
have
been
the
industry's
first
preference
and
a
far
more
rigorous
and
onerous
bylaw.
That
might
require
a
permit
system.
I
share
the
advice
or
I
agree
with
the
advice.
That's
been
given
to
a
committee
that
a
permit
system
is
going
to
be
time-consuming,
it's
going
to
be
expensive,
it's
going
to
take
up
staff
resources
and
let's
give
this
a
try.
G
I
think
one
of
the
important
aspects
of
this
report,
as
we've
seen
in
many
other
reports
to
committee
over
the
last
few
years,
is
that
staff
are
recommending
that
they'll
come
back
in
two
years
with
a
width
report
on
how
things
are
going.
We
certainly
are
optimistic
that
when
they
come
back,
they'll
say
things
are
going
and
just
fine.
G
The
last
thing
I
will
do
is
just
to
support
the
comments
from
ms
McPherson
in
terms
of
the
30
meters
versus
the
120
meters
that
were
brought
up
industry
johannes.
I
think
we
have
to
be
cognizant
of
the
fact
that
the
120
meters
in
your
Official
Plan
policies
and
in
provincial
policies
and
guidelines
is
not
a
setback,
is
simply
add
an
area
where
you
are
required
to
do
studies
if
you're
proposing
development
within
120
metres,
it's
not
a
set,
but
setback.
G
The
30
metres
is
more
realistically
the
recommendation
that
you
will
see
time
and
time
again
out
of
environmental
impact
studies
in
terms
of
of
buffer
areas
or
setbacks
that
might
be
recommended
from
those
natural
features.
So
the
30
metre
provision
that's
in
the
site.
Alteration
file
is
very
appropriate
and
reasonable
subject
to
any
questions
from
members
of
the
committee.
Those
are
my
submissions,
madam
chair
Thank,.
D
B
G
B
A
First
of
all,
some
of
the
things
we
like
some
of
the
things
we
have
still
concerns
about,
and
maybe
a
few
suggestions
so,
first
of
all
we're
quite
pleased
that
the
proposal
covers
both
rural
and
urban.
It
includes
removal
of
vegetation
in
the
definition
of
site
alliteration
and
that
the
identification
of
a
30
meter
range.
A
We
see
that
that
is
part
of
the
needs
of
prior
approval.
Although
the
extent
of
that
or
expansion
of
that
is
another
element.
At
our
last
meeting
last
week,
we
had
a
number
of
glorious
statements
and
I
hope
that
each
of
the
councillors
have
that
in
front
of
them,
or
that
is
shared.
But
what
we
did
do
is
we
looked
at
this
as
a
working
group,
and
we
suggest
the
following
that,
if
you
do
go
forward
with
this
bylaw
that
award
councillor
must
be
notified
of
any
intended
site
alteration.
A
That's
a
huge
part
of
this,
the
permit
system,
we
still
believe
very
strongly
in
that
being
required,
and
the
city
approval
for
any
site,
alteration
within
120
metres
of
any
natural
or
otherwise
protected
area
and
the
whole
notion
of
our
membership
be
engaged
in
this
discussion.
I
think
is
really
really
helpful.
A
A
The
permit
system,
we
feel
strongly,
helps
regulate.
We've
seen
this
across
the
province.
That's
a
huge
issue
and
I
have
had
this
discussion
with
any.
We
did
talk
about
the
notion
of
why
we
can't
go
that
route
and
the
example
given
was.
It
was
just
too
costly
to
the
city
for
staffing,
but
if
truly
believe
in
the
protection
of
these
environmental
areas,
it's
extremely
important
that
we
make
every
effort
so
that
not
convinced
nor
we
convinced
about
just
a
three
one.
A
One
call
activating
the
follow
up
and
I
guess
what
will
it
take
bottom
line
to
have
staff
more
staff
support
on
this
whole
issue?
A
couple
of
suggestions
along
with
this
and
we've
recently
come
through
this
with
mature
neighborhoods,
and
this
is
very
interesting
document
and
I
was
very
pleased
to
see
the
10
principles,
I
believe
going
as
a
background
for
this
whole
notion
of
site
alteration.
Those
are
great
rules
of
thumb
to
follow
and
we've
currently
actually
mr.
Willis
knows
about
I
know.
A
Gobo
we've
had
this
discussion
about
that
message,
getting
out
to
anybody
doing
an
application.
So,
similarly
can
we
do
that
as
maybe
the
best
practice,
and
it's
just
that
great
communication
line.
We
all
know
neighborhoods
that
have
strong
community
associations
and
planning
groups,
and
they
make
that
a
high
priority
to
have
that
engagement
with
the
developers.
We
also
know
that
there
have
been
some
bad
practices
and
how
do
we
move
away
from
that?
Well,
it's
going
to
take
a
concerted
effort
by
all
of
us,
so
I
guess.
In
summary,
there
are
some
things
here.
A
Certainly
we
really
like
the
principles
I
toss
out
this
as
a
mature,
neighborhood
sort
of
maybe
approach
going
forward
with
very,
very
strong
communications
with
the
applicants
and
working
together
to
review
this
closely.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you.
Sheila,
thanks
for
coming
out
today
and
hanging
around
for
as
long
as
you
did,
anybody
have
any
questions
for
miss
Perry.
So
thank
you.
Thank
you
to
counter
this.
One
was
of
you
whether
you
Custer
disciplined,
have
questions
yeah.
C
C
To
get
one
of
my
questions
answered
on
the
side
there,
so
I
actually
wanted
to
follow
up
on
something
Sheila
mentioned,
which
I
think
was
a
good
point.
The
ten
rules
or
guidelines
in
the
report
strike
me
as
being
highly
highly
reasonable.
Maybe
staff
could
outline
how
someone
would
know
about
them
if
they
were
planning
to
do
site
alteration.
So
what
are
going
to
be
the
communication
techniques
to
make
sure
the
word
gets
up.
A
Certainly,
madam
chair,
the
communications
plan
to
include
brochures
which
are
in
development
now
in
the
design
stage,
and
they
will
be
available
at
all
of
our
client
service
centers
and
our
intent
is
to
have
them
handed
out
with
building
permits
and
have
the
development
information
officers
have
a
supply
of
those
available
to
them
to
hand
out
to
people
coming
in
and
asking
questions.
The
information
will
all
be
available
on
the
city's
website
on
an
ongoing
basis.
A
The
the
city's
bylaw
section
of
the
website
already
has
a
lot
of
good
information
about
the
other
bylaws
in
the
city
and
how
they
apply
to
residents.
We
will
add
a
new
page
there
to
deal
with
this
one
well,
so
we
will
have
communications
going
out
to
the
public
and
certainly
we've
had
some
very
engaged.
Stakeholders
in
this
and
I
would
hope
that
those
of
them
that
support
the
bylaw
would
also
help
out
on
a
voluntary
basis
to
help
spread
the
word
as
well
through
their
networks.
Okay,.
G
F
Cement
chair
those
I
mean
the
site
alteration
bylaw,
incorporates
the
drainage,
bylaw,
sort
of
drainage
by
law,
and
the
provisions
that
were
part
of
that
are
now
included
as
part
of
the
overall
site
alteration
bylaw
as
we're
the
former
top
soil
removal,
soil
or
the
top
soil
removal
bylaws
of
various
for
municipalities.
So
it's
all
covered
off
in
here.
In
terms
of
the
details,
I
mean
on
the
spec.
Fierson
can
definitely
speak
to
the
details,
but
it
is
raw
all
role
to
get
so
really.
F
What
we're
doing
here
is
identifying
the
things
that
can
occur
and
identifying
the
best
practices
when
you're
dealing
with
site
alteration
and
setting
out
the
basic
rules
that
are
expected
to
be
met
by
those
that
undertakes
alter
site
alteration
in
many
instances.
Site
alteration
particularly
deal
with
development
later
than
ishutin
is
really
part
and
parcel
to
development
application
review.
But
there
is
some
pre-work
that
happens
on
sites
out
prior
to
formal
applications
coming
in.
It
is
basically
sets
the
stage
in
terms
of
what
the
expectations
are.
F
It
doesn't
affect
normal
agricultural
practices
or
quarry
operations
or
normal
things
that
would
be
associated
with
what
a
farmer
would
do
with
their
land.
Those
things
are
all
permitted,
but
it
does
speak
to
issues
around
drainage.
So
one
of
the
things
clearly
a
principle
is
that
you're
not
adversely
impacting
drainage
from
your
property
into
natural
drainage
courses
or
flooding
out
your
neighbor's
property,
so
those
things
are
all
covered
off
comprehensively
within
this
bylaw,
rather
than
what
we
had
previously,
which
was
different
bylaws
dealing
with
different
things,
so
this
is
pulling
all
the
pieces
together.
Thank.
B
You
Kara
a
couple
of
different
questions:
the
first
with
respect
to
taking
a
look
at
this
issue
in
the
peri-urban
areas.
I
just
want
to
get
a
seek
some
assurance
that,
while
I
have
heard
that
that
can
be
punted
to
the
urban
tree
conservation,
bylaw
review
that
it
will
be
considered
in
the
scope
of
that
review.
Given
that
I,
don't
think
we're
talking
about
urban.
F
F
The
urban
tree
conservation
by
law
review
is
in
the
scope
of
the
urban
forest
management
plan
and
I
think
there's
some
ability
for
us
to
take
a
look
in
possible
expansion
areas.
So
there's
a
means
for
us
to
take
a
look
at
that
and
that's
really
what
the
purpose
is.
If
there
is
a
hole
and
a
void
that
needs
to
be
that
we
need
to
take
a
look
at
we'll
look
at
it
through
that
process.
So.
F
B
B
F
B
Then,
with
respect
to
this
30
meter
120
meter,
the
answer
that
I've
heard
is
that
the
artificial
plan
calls
for
an
additional
level
of
scrutiny
when
something
is
going
to
be
altered
within
120
metres
of
a
natural
or
sensitive
area.
This
bylaw
proposes
30
metres.
There
must
be
some
reason,
though
I
the
opie
calls
for
120
why
that
is
considered
the
threshold
at
which
we
need
to
potentially
scrutinize
things
a
bit
more.
B
F
I
think
ma'am
Sharon
and
mr.
McPherson
will
step
in
if
I'm
misstating,
but
the
provincial
policy
statement
is
the
driver
on
that.
One
provincial
policy
statement
deals
with
matters
that
are
dealt
with
under
the
Planning
Act
drainage,
broad
site,
alteration
bylaw,
something
that's
not
a
municipal
act.
So
there
is
the
ability
to
define
what
makes
sense,
and
in
this
instance,
as
Miss
Macpherson
indicated
and
as
mr.
Chow
indicated.
F
B
F
F
I
think,
as
indicated
by
mr.
Chan,
it's
not
that
you
can't
do
things
within
120
meters.
It's
you
need
to
be
very
careful
in
terms
of
how
you
deal
with
it,
and
it
really
relates
more
to
development
activity
within
that
120
meter,
distant
site,
alteration,
yeah,
it's
it
has
an
implication
in
terms
of
the
lands
but
with
the
best
practices
that
we're
putting
in
place
in
the
experiences
that
we've
had
the
30
meter
in
terms
of
being
the
area
within
which
we
would
need
a
specific
EIS
undertaken.
F
B
Okay,
and
that
will
actually
bring
me
to
my
last
question,
which
is
with
respect
to
making
sure
counselor
miss
Baum,
asked
some
questions
around
ensuring
that
there
is
awareness
on
that
I'm
wondering
how
we
can
proactively
reach
out
to
landowners
to
maybe
even
ask
them
to
give
us
a
call
before
they
undertake
alteration
not
for
permits,
but
in
order
to
give
them
a
an
opportunity
to
find
out
about
what
the
new
site
by
law
or
site
alteration.
Bylaw
says.
A
A
G
A
A
B
F
So,
madam
chair,
again,
there's
going
to
be
information,
will
be
posted
online
information
in
terms
of
site
alteration
by
large
expectations
associated
with
that,
but
really
and
truly
for
the
most
part.
This
is
really
capturing
best
practices
and
the
experience
that
we
have
is,
for
the
most
part,
those
that
are
involved
in
altering
sites,
preparing
them
for
development
employed
best
practices,
and
this
is
a
complaint
driven
system
that
we're
involved
with
here.
We
and
and
we've
got
the
whole
monetary
system
set
up.
F
We
expect
that
we
will
actually
have
very
good
results
coming
out
of
that
monitoring,
exercise
and
I.
Think
it's
just
a
matter
of
mapping
things
out.
I
mean
we
have
to
recognize
that
we've
been
in
operating
for
many
many
years
without
a
saw
alteration
by
law.
That's
trying
to
pull
these
things
together,
okay
and
that's
the
two,
your
monitoring
process,
or,
at
my
own
time,
that's
correct,
now
sheriff
okay.
Thank
you
very
much
sure
thank.
A
A
A
B
I
mean
if
I
can
get
quick
context,
that
I
can
we
get
out
of
a
public
delegation.
So
just
briefly-
and
it's
all
self-explanatory
in
the
report-
but
the
the
applicant
approached
me
a
few
months
ago
because
he
felt
he
was
basically
misled
by
the
local
councillor
for
the
area
with
his
application
and
he's
been
working
in
good
faith
with
the
city
for
three
years.
B
I
think
making
certain
modifications
and
changes
to
his
property
and
he
was
impacted
by
the
interim
control
bylaw
and
never
at
any
point
to
my
aware
of
any
urban
councillors
that
support
bunk
houses
and
so,
instead
of
the
local
councillor
telling
him
that
he
doesn't
want
to
see
this
kind
of
development
happening.
He
was
telling
him
to
move
trees
and
fences
and
different
things
and
he's
got
his
architects
and
his
lawyer
here
too,
to
walk
us
through
some
of
that.
So
working
in
good
faith
with
the
city
he's
not
a
developer.
B
So
he
doesn't
he's
not
as
familiar
with
the
planning
act
and
was
doing
those
things
in
good
faith
to
appease
the
counselor
and
to
move
forward
with
the
application
and
obviously
got
caught
with.
In
the
interim
control,
but
to
add
insult
to
injury
and
has
stated
in
the
documents
from
his
lawyer
as
well,
there
was
a
similar
application
that
was
just
as
advanced
in
the
planning
process,
70
Russell,
which
passed
and
has
didn't
for
whatever
reason.
So
that's
the
context
in
a
nutshell
and
a
lot
I
guess
mr.
Weber
explained
on
behalf
of
mr.
F
Madam
chair
members
of
committee,
mr.
Hanna's
with
me
and
our
architect
and
Smith,
we
concur
in
every
councillors,
said
that's
the
essence
of
the
case.
Mr.
Hanna
is
a
baker
and
a
merchant
from
time
to
time
he
invests
in
residential,
real
property.
He
bought
these
two
properties
on
Anderson
they've
been
used
for
student
housing.
For
years
he
continued
to
use.
It
became
apparent
that
the
buildings
were
becoming
in
a
rundown
condition
and
he
began
exploring
alternatives.
F
Had
someone
explained
to
a
Monday
one
that,
after
he
spent
$50,000
to
advance
its
applications,
it
would
be
cut
off
by
an
arbitrary
measure.
He
assures
me
he
just
would
have
spent
250
thousand
on
the
renovations
so
that
this
misleading
is
critically
important.
The
spinning
that's
gone
on
about
this
case.
There
are
three
messages:
I
want
to
give
you
that
he
was
misled,
that
he
was
first
in
priority
and
should
not
have
been
preceded
by
70
Russell
and
thirdly,
that
you
can
make
all
this
go
away,
because
this
is
now
the
last
appeal.
F
F
Now,
as
the
misleading
I
want
you
to
remember,
July
12
2017,
the
glorious
twelfth
was
ad
ad
interim
controlled
by
all
Amish
for
the
first
time
so
before
that
nobody
on
the
outside
was
aware
of
the
fact
that
this
was
coming
on
July
the
4th
so
eight
days
earlier,
the
planning
staff
in
writing
said
to
forward
the
application
is
consistent
with
the
policy
set
out
in
the
general
urban
area.
Designation
in
the
Official
Plan,
which
contemplates
a
range
of
residential
uses,
conforms
the
Official
Plan.
F
The
proposal
is
consistent
with
the
policy
set
out
in
the
low-profile
residential
designation
sandy
Hills
secondary
plan
conforms
with
the
Official
Plan.
The
proposed
addition
conforms
to
the
applicable
provisions
of
the
are
forage
for
a
t-zone
in
zoning
bylaw
280
of
250
minor
variants.
Approval
was
obtained
with
the
final
number
for
the
203
Anderson
side
area
to
primitive,
secondary
dwelling
as
that
law,
it
was
slightly
deflate,
lead
efficient.
F
So
when
you
read
in
later
reports
like
today's
report,
well,
there
might
be
a
problem
with
the
intent
of
the
Official
Plan,
or
some
might
argue
that
the
intent
of
the
zoning
bylaw-
that's
not
all,
and
if
these
guys
want
to
stand
up
at
the
OMB-
and
let
me
feed
this
page
from
one
paragraph
at
a
time,
I
mean
we're
willing
to
undertake
exercise.
That
was
the
planning
Suburbans
position.
Eight
days
before
the
interim
comprehensive
the
interim
Control
bylaw.
It
was
also
good,
positioned
throughout
you
see
nobody
ever
said
to
mr.
Hanna,
all
winter.
F
Like
that
kind
of
development,
you
got
a
problem
with
the
old
P.
You
got
a
problem
with
the
zoning,
they
would
say
well,
you're
going
to
need
a
couple
of
minor
variances,
here's
what
they
are,
go
and
get
them.
We
don't
like
the
facade.
We
want
you
to
change
the
materials
redo.
Your
plans
get
a
survey
done.
He
did
all
of
that.
His
applications
were
made
between
June
and
July
of
2015.
F
Fully
two
years
later
he
had
complied
with
every
request
of
the
city.
He
had
negotiated
this
through
the
ward
counselor's
office.
He
negotiated
with
a
community
through
the
minor
variance
process.
Revised
plans
were
endlessly
produced
and
he
spent
fifty
thousand
dollars
to
get
to
that
point,
and
no
one
ever
said
to
him.
Oh,
we
don't
like
that
until
after
the
fact
now
I
just
say:
oh
that
that's
grossly
unfair,
that
he
relied
on
these
representations
that
he
was
going
in
a
right
way.
F
Why
would
anybody
spend
that
kind
of
money
if
you're
going
to
be
told
you're
cut
off
at
the
end,
never
mind?
You
know
the
next
hundred
thousand
he's
going
to
have
to
spend
to
go
to
the
board.
He
would
have
said,
as
he
tells
me,
I
just
renovate
the
building.
Okay,
you
know
I
make
my
money
on
it
anyway,
so
those
misleading
facts
really
led
him
into
this
disaster
and
I.
Think
of
it
as
Lucy
in
the
football.
You
know
every
time
Charlie
Brown
comes
up
to
kick
it
loose.
He
pulls
the
football
away.
F
What
didn't
cause
Charlie
Brown
$50,000
if
he
chose
to
come
back
and
try
and
kick
the
football
again,
but
that
what
was
was
what's
going
on
just
change
that
garbage
disposal?
We
don't
like
that,
bring
us
in
new
plans
about
the
garbage
disposal.
He
did.
He
acted
as
he
was
requested
to
act
by
responsible
city
officials.
He
complied
in
all
times
at
places.
F
F
That's
because
his
site
plan
approval
was
granted
by
delegated
authority
on
July
the
fourth,
the
Russell
70
Russell
had
the
delegated
approval
withdrawn
by
Councillor
flurry,
and
they
did
not
have
a
site
plan
control
approval
on
that
date.
We
then
came
to
planning
committee
on
the
11th,
and
some
of
you
were
there
and
will
remember
the
show.
F
The
various
persons
were
called
from
the
community
to
talk
about
the
difficulties
with
these
properties,
but
it
was
apparent
that
the
planning
committee
was
going
to
give
a
site
plan
approval
to
70
Russell.
It
was
so
far
down
the
path
faced
with
that
counselor
flurry
then
withdraw
withdrew
his
withdrawal
of
delegated
30
everybody
stepped
outside
and
signed
a
site
plan
agreement.
So
as
of
the
11th
of
July,
7
tear
us
'l
caught
up
to
203,
205
henderson,
then
of
course
on
the
12th.
When
it
went
to
council
were
not
there,
nobody
knows
what
happens.
F
G
F
A
B
F
B
B
B
A
B
F
B
B
I'd
like
to
start
just
to
maybe
set
the
the
table
for
the
discussion
first
time
for
most
colleagues.
I
do
think
that
we
have
mutual
respect
in
items
that
we
bring
to
committee
and
when,
when
items
are
not
in
our
ward,
they
do
not
influence
us
as
much
unless
they
are
citywide
impacts.
As
you
know,
in
Sandy
Hill,
over
the
last
seven
years,
we've
had
seven
reports
that
relate
to
the
bunk
house
issue.
B
It
started
off
with
my
first
year
being
elected
in
late
2010,
early
2011,
where
we
brought
in
an
interim
Control
bylaw
on
conversions
and
since
then
we're
only
trying
to
capture
the
issue,
I'll
finish
and
have
questions
for
mr.
Smith
and
mr.
mark.
But
my
understanding
is
that
the
purpose
of
an
interim
Control
bylaw
is
to
capture
an
emergency
situation
and
not
necessarily
to
inform
property
owners
of
that
issue,
so
that
the
city
can
further
review
and
analyze
and
come
back
with
zoning
solutions
on
a
matter.
That's
why?
B
If
you
recall,
there's
a
lot
of
reference
to
the
70
Russell
issue,
we
have
to
keep
in
mind
that
in
Sandy
Hill
one
of
the
measures
that
we
landed
over
the
six
different
reports,
one
was
the
site
plan
light
which
meant
that
someone
can
just
walk
in
to
the
development
review
office
downstairs,
submit
the
four
plans
and
building
and
get
a
go-ahead.
They
required
site
plan
that
required
site
plan.
Even
if
I
didn't
agree
with
the
zoning
then
give
me
the
tools
to
not
to
not
allow
the
development
to
proceed.
B
What
happened
with
the
70
Russell
is
that
a
similar
type
of
building
that
the
building
was,
in
my
belief
of
heritage
significance
and
the
only
way
to
bring
that
to
committees,
table
I,
don't
want
to
burden
committees.
Efforts
I,
didn't
bring
all
of
the
bunk
house
issues
all
the
site
plan
issues
to
committee,
but
we
chose
that
one
for
strategic
reason
for
the
interim
Control
bylaw
purposes,
but
also
because
we
wanted
to
make
a
hearing
of
the
heritage
components
of
the
70
Russell
property.
B
If
you
remember
and
recall,
there
was
lengthy
discussions
on
the
type
of
build
form,
the
amount
of
bedrooms
and
why
bunk
houses
weren't
desirable
that
this?
The
the
word
from
our
legal
team
at
the
time
was
to
say:
committee
doesn't
really
have
a
whole
and
a
decision
to
make
at
that
point,
because
it's
a
site
plan
and
there's
no
real
site
plan
issues
on
the
70
Russell.
B
That's
why
I
then
pull
the
delegated
authority
and
allow
the
South
proceeding
to
continue,
but
at
that
same
meeting,
Council
made
council
and
committee
made
a
really
important
decision,
which
was
to
land
me
and
true
control,
bylaw
to
capture
in
a
lot
of
these
zones,
and
you
know
I'll,
let
the
mr.
Smith
speak
to
it
all
of
those
properties
that
our
bunk
houses
and
to
allow
staff
to
further
review
it.
My
area
to
this
date,
there
16
left,
there's
16
of
em
that
we
could
have
pulled
earlier
theory.
B
They
could
again
use
a
different
counsellor
to
bring
it
back
to
the
fourth
committee
that
those
issues
continue
exist
in
every
ward,
where
those
properties
that
were
in
process
are
captured
again,
I
don't
decide,
what's
permitted
in
zoning,
so
I,
don't
like
that.
The
applicant
says,
if
you
didn't
like
the
bedrooms,
you
should
have
told
us.
We
clearly
told
you,
but
there's
nothing
that
we
can
do
in
zone
because
we're
not
reviewing
the
zoning.
So
that's
the
tool
of
the
interim
Control
bylaw
that
that
is
in
front
of
us.
B
So
not
only
you
know,
do
I
feel
that
that
the
motion
is
not
respectful
of
a
collie
because,
as
you
know,
we
all
work
out
in
our
own
areas
and
you
know
I,
don't
think
that
it's
helpful
to
come
in
on
such
a
complex
issue
in
area
like
Sandy
Hill,
on
the
intro
below
and
on
the
r4
and
on
the
buck.
Ellis
issue.
A
B
You
have
to
recall
the
seventy
rustle
discussion.
We
didn't
have
the
interim
Control
bylaw.
We
were
looking
at
it
with
it
with
mr.
mark
and
mr.
Willis
at
the
time.
In
the
background,
we
knew
that
we
needed
to
pick
one
of
the
prime
example
of
why
bunk
houses
were
an
issue
in
an
area
and
collectively
we
chose
that
70
Russell
was
an
example.
I
had
polled
Valley
Authority,
because
I
couldn't
get
clarity
on
the
facade.
The
brick.
B
As
you
recall,
there
was
red
brick
on
a
70
wrestle
property,
so
it
was
one
that
was
worth
coming
to
committee,
that
from
the
legal
staffs
when
legal
staff
presented
to
committee
saying
committee
I,
don't
know
what
you're
going
to
vote
on.
Really
you
only
look
at
the
site
plan.
There's
nothing
in
zoning,
there's
no
real
infraction
to
the
site
plan,
so
I
at
that
point,
remove
delegate
authority
and
allowed
staff
to
proceed
with
with
their
work.
On
that
front.
A
C
C
C
Yes,
madam
chair
correct,
so
I
can
tell
you
that
I
had
a
number
of
building
owners
come
to
me
after
the
interim
Control
bylaw
was
enacted
because
part
of
the
area
included
areas
of
my
ward
and
my
advice
to
them
was.
If
you
go
to
the
committee
adjustment,
you
can
argue
your
case
and
I
believe
some
of
them
have
done
so
successfully.
Is
that
your
understanding
as
well
I.
C
I
can
tell
you
from
my
recollection
that
one
in
particular
that
I
know
of
went
to
committee
adjustment
successfully
made
a
change
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
and,
as
a
result
of
that
was
able
to
proceed
so
I
think
that's
important
context
here
that
council,
in
its
wisdom,
unanimously
passed
an
interim
Control
bylaw.
It
allows
a
building
owner
to
go
to
the
committee
of
adjustment.
Many
have
so
I
again,
I
think
that's
important
context
here.
C
My
second
question
relates
to
whether
or
not
staff
are
aware
of
what
the
likely
impact
would
have
been
if
staff
or
council
had
provided
notice
weeks
in
advance
of
passing
the
interim
control
Barlow.
What
what
would
one
anticipate
have
been
the
likely
outcome
of
that
kind
of
notice?
Madam
chair,
it's.
B
Fair
to
say
that
the
very
purpose
of
an
interim
Control
bylaw
is
to
bring
an
immediate
stop
to
building
permit
applications
because
of
what
is
in
councils,
mind
a
pressing
planning
concern.
If
one
provides
notice
of
it,
then
one
can
expect
a
rush
to
building
code
services
in
order
to
complete
the
permit
process.
C
B
F
F
Incremental
steps
were
being
taken
over
the
years
to
try
to
manage
and
deal
with
it,
and
a
determination
was
made
that
we
actually
need
to
take
a
much
more
comprehensive,
look
out
this
and
give
us
time
to
actually
undertake
that
we
have
initiated
the
r4,
but
the
r4
was
not
able
to
get
concluded
in
enough
time
to
be
able
to
really
deal
with
the
issue.
So
it
was
really
from
planning
staffs
perspective.
C
B
With
respect
to
being
led
down
the
garden
path,
they
have
told
us
that
they
were
told
at
multiple
points
by
planning
staff
that
they
were
in
conformity
with
the
Official
Plan
I
presume
that,
even
when
planning
staff
do
not
agree
with
the
general
thrust
of
where
development
is
going,
that
if
something
conforms
with
a
particular
regulation
that
they
are
told
that
it
conforms
right,
okay,
I'll,
take
that
as
a
yes
yeah,
then
I'm,
chair
I.
Of
course,
I
can't
speak
for
my
development
of
view.
B
Colleagues,
with
respect
to
what
it
is
they
didn't
didn't
say
what
I
would
say
is
with
respect
to
the
Official
Plan.
Certainly,
the
official
plan
contemplates
low-rise
development,
which
this
development
would
satisfy.
It
is
of
that
height
range
that
is
in
there.
It
is
certainly
on
the
lot
that
the
Official
Plan
would
contemplate
for
being
there
and
being
as
such
and
being
there
as
well
with
respect
to
the
zoning
bylaw.
We
have
to
recall
this
well
that
the
zoning
bylaw
does
not
put
a
cap
on
bedrooms
and
so
the
development
application
when
it
comes
through.
B
We
are
obligated
to
process
the
development
application
as
it
comes
through
with
statutory
timelines
applicable
to
both
the
Planning
Act
and
also
through
City
Council
as
well,
and
this
is
why
we
have
the
interim
Control
bylaw
mechanism.
I,
believe
is
because,
from
time
to
time,
the
zoning
the
Official
Plan,
the
regulatory
regime
allows
developments
that
are
counter
to
the
public
interest,
and
so
we
have
the
ability,
through
the
interim
Control
bylaw,
to
stop
from
being
built
things
that
would
otherwise
be
permitted
to
be
built.
B
So
I
I
do
not
believe
in
this
instance
that
they
were
led
down
the
garden
path.
They
were
being
given
accurate
answers
to
their
questions.
Unfortunately,
the
accurate
answers
to
their
questions
are
leading
to
a
place
that
is
counter
to
the
public
interest,
at
least
until
we
have
a
good
understanding
through
a
for
study,
of
whether
these
sorts
of
developments
should
be
permitted
moving
ahead.
So
I
have
a
really
difficult
time.
Having
sympathy
for
that
argument,
yes,
the
information
was
accurate.
That
doesn't
mean
the
developments
should
be
allowed
to
go.
B
Go
ahead,
do
have
we
ever
telegraphed
an
ICD.
Why,
in
passed
and
given
notice
to
the
industry
that
we
are
about
to
pass
one
I
am
relying
on
the
fog
of
my
memory.
Madam
chair
I
think
that
one
of
the
intricate
OVA
lots
of
redundant
counselor,
twelve
war,
twelve
by
the
current
counselors
predecessor,
may
have
had
some
notice
of
his
most,
but
otherwise,
whenever
we
passed
these,
it's
it
generally
comes
as
a
surprise
to
the
industry.
Thank
you.
A
B
B
And
was
the
counselor
aware
of
that
as
well?
No
I,
don't
believe
the
good
well.
Certainly
I
had
not
advised
it
because
I
don't
recall,
okay
good,
so
just
so,
you
know
from
December.
Until
now,
at
the
request
of
many
people
saying
to
be
able
to
go
through
appropriate
process
to
go
through
committee,
this
is
the
channel
we
should
use
and
myself
as
vice-chair
on
there
to
help
assist
in
moving
motions
for
people
that
don't
sit
on
this
committee.
That's
how
it
got
to
this
point.
B
B
E
B
B
Mr.
mark,
so
just
so
I'm
100%
clear
in
the
committee
as
well,
but
the
main
argument
from
the
delegate
today
that
we
were
so
far
along
in
this
process,
and
we
didn't
get
noticed
that
the
internal
control
bylaw
motion
was
coming
and
it
nailed
us
that
the
last
second
or
are
there
any
issues
where
there
were
delays
caused
by
the
city
which
contributed
to
them
not
getting
through
this
process.
Before
the
interim
Control
bylaw
went
into
effect.
B
B
They
heard
the
presentation
today
and
then,
of
course,
was
the
submission
back
in
November
as
a
communication
account
as
to
the
steps
that
occurred,
and
it's
for
committee
to
decide
whether
or
not
that
changes
in
mind,
but
there's
a
normal
process
that
these
types
of
files
go
through,
whether
any
delays
caused
by
the
city
which
contributed
to
them
not
meeting
this
process
before
the
interim
Control
bylaw
motion
was
passed.
Did
the
city
contribute
to
that
delay?
C
Thank
You
mr.
vice
chair,
so
I
would
encourage
colleagues
to
vote
against
this
motion
for
a
couple
of
reasons.
One
of
them
is
I
think
we
have
a
perfectly
good
process
available
in
the
City
of
Ottawa
to
those
who
feel
aggrieved
by
the
interim
control
bylaw,
which
is
they
can
go
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
which
we
have
delegated
to
address
matters
of
minor
variances,
and
if
someone
feels
that
they
would
otherwise,
you
know
meet
the
spirit
and
intent
of
the
floor
protest.
They
have
every
ability
to
do
so.
C
As
I
mentioned
earlier,
I
had
a
number
of
building
owners
come
to
me
after
the
implementation
of
the
interim
Control
bylaw
I.
Respecting
counsels
wishes
with
the
unanimous
passing
of
it.
It
buys
them
to
go
to
the
committee
of
adjustment
and
I'm
happy
to
note
that
at
least
one
was
successful
in
getting
the
zoning
they
required
and
they
were
able
to
draw
their
building
permits.
C
It's
going
to
be
very
difficult
to
achieve
the
objective
of
the
interim
Control
bylaw,
which
was
precisely
to
not
allow
these
buildings
to
move
forward
for
a
period
of
12
months
to
give
the
staff
an
opportunity
to
do
the
our
fourth
review
and
figure
out
and
come
back
and
provide
us
advice,
presumably,
and
by
the
end
of
this,
this
council
term,
on
how
they
think
we
ought
to
move
forward
on.
This
strikes
me
as
being
a
highly
reasonable
proposal.
A
number
of
wards
were
captured,
mine
included
again.
C
I
have
advised
a
number
of
building
owners
that
the
committee
adjustment
is
the
proper
process
and
I.
Don't
really
think
that
this
is
an
appropriate
way
to
do
that.
So,
on
that
basis,
I
would
strongly
encourage
colleagues
to
vote
against
this
motion.
I
think
it's
improper
and
I
don't
think
it
captures
the
intent
of
what
council
did
when
it
passed
this
inter
control
law
back
in
July.
Thank
you.
C
B
B
He
was
very
clear
that
he
didn't
support
that
kind
of
development
and
that
kind
of
construction
in
his
area
so,
and
we
heard
loud
and
clear
from
the
applicant
that
had
he
received
those
messages
early
on,
he
would
have
not
invested.
Why
would
he
have
invested
$50,000
of
his
money?
Had
he
been
given
that
message
from
the
counselor
at
the
time?
So
I
don't
buy
that
you
know
I
don't
buy
that
that
he
was
told
that
and
he
did
proceed
with
it.
Anyways
he's
a
he's,
a
bakery
owner.
B
He
doesn't
he's
not
knowledgeable
in
the
planning
process.
He
was
working
in
good
faith
with
the
city
based
on
feedback
that
he
was
being
given
from
planning
and
from
the
local
counselor,
and
you
know
this
notion
that
there's
16
other
properties
who
and
this
willy-nilly
thing
that
we're
going
to
be
doing
the
two
properties
this
one
and
the
other
170
Russell-
are
the
only
two
that
were
very
advanced
in
the
process.
Three
years
he's
been
working
on
this
making
changes,
and
you
know
you
saw
what
Tim
mark
said.
B
He
couldn't
say
if
anything,
that
the
city
staff
told
them
to
do
change
things,
but
I
take
that
as
a
yes,
because
they
kept
on
dragging
this
on
and
on
bite
to
move
a
tree,
a
new
offense
to
keep
dragging
it
on
interim
control,
stuff
and
NFL
development
has
been
a
problem
for
many
years.
None
of
us
support
bunkhouses.
The
local
councillors
should
have
made
that
clear
to
him
on
day
one
when
he
came
in
with
that
22-room
plan.
B
He
shouldn't
have
waited
three
years
to
let
him
know
that
that
was
happening
and
the
point
of
interim
control
is
to
stop
everything
in
the
tracks.
But
again
there
was
nothing
that
prevented
the
local
councillor
from
being
very
clear
and
upfront
about
that
from
the
get-go,
so
we're
giving
preferential
treatment
to
70
Russell,
who,
which
was
just
as
advanced
in
the
application
process,
and
we're
telling
this
person
here
who
was
working
in
good
faith
with
the
city,
doing
everything
he
was
told
to
do
by
planning
of
a
local
councillor.
B
No
sorry
interim
control
doesn't
is
not
when
I
bending
the
rules
for
you.
What
will
bend
it
for
70
Russell,
for
who
knows
why
I'm
not
going
to
speculate
on
why?
But
we've
heard
from
the
lawyer
about
delegate
authority
withdrawing
a
man
with
triangle,
withdrawal
of
delegated
authority,
so
I'll
leave
it
at
that
and,
as
I
said,
I
have
no
interest
and
meddling
in
anyone
else's
backyard.
I've
been
here
all
day
too,
for
this
waiting
for
this
item.
B
C
No
I
walked
back
on
and
the
reason
is
I
think
as
a
point
of
clarification.
I
should
know
again.
My
ward
was
on
this
interim
Control
bylaw
I.
Think
I
was
informed
if
memory
serves
at
nine
o'clock
the
morning
that
this
was
brought
to
Council.
So
I
just
want
to
state
that
if
there
had
been
a
builder
who
had
come
to
me
and
said,
hey
I'm
planning
to
do
this
and
I
looked
at
all
of
the
official
plan
and
zoning
bylaw
and
requirements
I
would
and
it
had
passed
them.
It
was
consistent
with
them.
C
C
A
B
Yesterday
that,
because
I
think
I
was
clear
about
sending
Russell,
so
I
don't
want
to
go
back
there
and
I
think
the
purpose
of
this
70
Russell
was
to
drop
the
interim
Control
bylaw,
so
I
don't
think
I
need
to
go
back
there.
We
are
in
full
mode
for
the
interim
control,
Varla
and
David
wise,
and
his
team
is
coming
forward
with
the
r4
at
some
point
this
year,
which
I'm
confident
will
bring
some
resolution
to
the
bunkhouse
issue.
B
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
resident
in
Sandy,
Hill
I,
don't
think,
there's
a
property
owner
in
Sandy
Hill
that
thinks
that
the
bunk
houses
are
desirable
or
that
I'm
supportive
of
them.
So
when
I
hear
a
colleague
saying
we
weren't
clear
I
think
we're
confusing
the
fact
that
if
you
meet
zoning,
we
have
to
work
with
you
on
the
site
plan.
So
we
could
disagree
with
the
amount
of
height.
We
could
disagree
with
the
amount
of
bedrooms.
We
disagree
with
everything
that
if
it
needs
zoning,
it's
not
it's
not
a
point
of
discussion.
B
So
it's
not
a
starting
point.
So
you
know
I
know
it's
frustrating
for
communities
that
don't
have
necessarily
to
deal
with
site
plan
all
the
time,
but
in
this
context,
in
a
lot
of
urban
context,
the
zoning
is
in
place.
We
work
through
the
site
plan
components
I
want
to
go
specifically
for
this
application
in
the
context
of
the
interim
Control
bylaw,
and
that
will
be
the
end
of
my
comments.
So
the
development
is
a
contravention
of
criteria,
a
and
C
of
the
interim
Control
bylaw
in
the
following
matters.
B
The
principle
dwelling
unit
proposed
for
two
or
three
understand
will
include
seven
bedrooms
and
exceeds
the
120
square
metres
for
the
principal
dwelling
unit
proposed
for
205
Henderson
will
include
eight
bedrooms
and
exceed
120
square
meters
on
a
floor
area.
The
total
area
of
203
and
205
Anderson
include
both
principal
dwelling
units
and
all
included.
Secondary
dwelling
units
exceeds
500
square
meters
in
total
for
area
which
again
are
the
goals
of
the
interim
Control
bylaw.
So,
in
my
mind,
I
ask
committee
members.
B
There
are
a
lot
of
there
16
applicants
that
spent
money
in
their
effort
in
bringing
forward
applications.
Some
are
more
nor
less
advanced.
That's
nor
nor
there
the
ideas
that
when,
when
this
committee
approved
the
interim
Control
bylaw
when
council
approve
the
interim
control
dollar,
it's
set
parameters
and
it's
in
this
property
was
captured
in
the
parameters.
It's
clearly
a
bunkhouse.
A
Repeal
of
Island
number
2017
digit
relates
to
the
land
245
in
turn,
controlled
by
as
releasable
is
no
municipal
a
as
203
and
205
Henderson.
Avenue,
okay
got
it
so,
yes,
as
if
he
is
remove
it
and
no
is
stick
with
it.
Yeah
all
right,
so
counselor
blame
answer:
Brockington
no
kills
are
surely
gone:
cuz,
York,
Luce,
no
Telstra
hubely.
We
got
to
go
Sarita,
no
cancer,
miss
Bunn,
no
counselor
cadre,
no
place
chair
chanting.
Yes,
myself!
No!
A
A
B
Therefore,
up
your
resolve
that
planning
committee
recommend
council
approve
the
following
councillors
of
members,
be
part
of
the
developments
charge,
bylaw
sponsors
group,
Jan,
harder,
Allan,
hubli,
Stephen,
bleh,
Scott,
Moffat
and
Jeff
Lee
/.
They
all
have
various
rules,
whether
it's
urban
representative
member
of
a
rock
transit
audit
and
planning
committees,
well,.