►
From YouTube: Planning Committee meeting - June 26 2017 (1 of 2)
Description
Planning Committee meeting - June 26 2017 (1 of 2) Audio Stream
Agenda and background materials can be found at http://www.ottawa.ca/agendas.
A
People,
nobody
does
that
around
the
world.
It
sticks
out
like
in
the
sky.
You
do
that
on
Carling
and
pressed
on
it's
a
beautiful
building,
but
it's
crazy
45
floors
is
crazy.
Now
you
talked
about
the
Peace
Tower,
it's
beautiful,
just
old
cities
at
Downtown.
The
old
buildings
are
very
nice.
If
you
continue
like
that,
you
will
not
see
any
Peace
Tower
anymore
and
also
the
Parkway
and
the
glass.
All
this
will
basically
disappear
with
all
this
concrete
now,
I,
don't
care
that
much
I
tell
you
honestly
I'm
72
by
the
time
it's
done.
A
I
won't
be
here
anyway,
but
III
really
saying
45
floors.
You
should
think
about
it.
That's
my
major
beef
I
think
Tyler
Kat
buildings,
he'll
downtown.
When
I
came
here,
I
counted
the
floors.
Twenty
to
thirty
to
twenty
five
is
reasonable.
More
than
that,
unbelievable
unbelievable!
You
show
me
a
place
in
the
world
where
a
me
again,
I
repeat
we're
a
city
of
a
million
people,
have
that
you
have
that
in
Frankfurt
Germany,
but
what
it's
a
financial
center
of
the
world
and
it's
only
office
towers,
not
not
a
high-rise
for
living.
So
I'm!
A
Sorry,
that's
my
opinion.
As
I
said,
there's
only
two
places
in
the
world
I
was
thinking
about
where
a
city
has
million
or
less
where
they
have
that
and
it's
Abu
Dhabi
and
Doha.
Nowhere
else,
maybe
you
want
to
reinvent
the
world
it's
possible,
but
I.
Think
it's
too
high
and
I
know
it's
done
because
of
greed
because
it
brings
in
more
taxes,
and
it
also
makes
more
profit
for
the
Builder,
but
he
can
make
profit
at
25
floors
too.
That's
it.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
B
B
B
Great
as
we
work
on
technical
issues,
I
will
remind
committee
members.
This
is
on
the
shared
drive,
so
you
do
have
access
to
this
presentation.
Also,
mr.
dark,
if
you
want
to
take
the
opportunity,
feel
free
to
turn
your
mic
on
and
we
won't
hold
the
time
against
you
if
you
could
introduce
who's
at
the
table
with
you
right
now.
First
of
all,.
C
There
is
that
on.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Mr.
chair,
my
name
is
George
dark
I'm,
the
managing
partner
of
a
firm
called
urban
strategies
from
Toronto.
Thank
you,
I'm,
really
pleased
to
be
back.
I
haven't
been
here
for
a
while
and
East
flats
is
something
we've
been
working
on
for
some
time.
This
is
my
associate
Tim
Smith
and
we
have
also
in
case
our
questions
brought
our
transportation
consultant
who
produced
the
report.
That
is
part
of
the
submission.
If
you
would
have
questions
relative
to
his
technical
work,
great.
B
C
C
Certainly
we
are
here
today
in
full
support
of
the
report
that
staff
has
in
front
of
you
and
I
would
certainly
thank
them
for
all
of
the
critical
analysis
that
they
put
into
the
file
over
the
last
several
years.
It's
always
very
helpful
for
us.
These
things
you
all
wear
this
is.
This
is
a
transformational
place
years
and
years
ago
it
showed
up
on
our
downtown,
auto
urban
design
strategy
as
the
portion
below
the
escarpment
piece.
C
Of
course,
at
that
time
it
was
into
a
master
plan
which
probably
is
15
years
ahead
of
that
if
I
remember
correctly,
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
here
trying
to
feed
a
bus
way
through
here,
trying
to
understand
the
nature
of
how
the
BRT
would
come.
There
were
several
of
those
and,
of
course,
in
the
latest
iteration
it's
become
one
of
the
most
interesting
sights
on
your
new
LRT,
because
it
is
completely
consistent
with
the
LRT
station.
C
It's
one
of
the
pieces
of
land
where
the
station
area
and
the
development
site
are
actually
immediately
adjacent
to
each
other,
I
think
when
I
show
you
some
of
the
pictures
you'll
see
that,
in
fact
you
use
this
piece
of
land
to
walk
into
that
station,
because
it's
lower
booth
is
higher.
You'll,
actually
cut
across
this
site
to
walk
into
the
station
or
use
the
elevators
that
are
on
the
bridge.
We
have
been
working
on
this
synthetic
model
of
Ottawa
for
some
time.
C
You
of
course
know
that
the
West
End
and
what
we
call
the
front
of
the
city
is
a
very
dynamic
piece
of
planning
thinking.
There
are
two
sides
to
lebreton:
now
there
is
the
side
which
is
rendezvous,
lebreton
to
the
west
and
the
Claridge
pitch,
which
is
to
the
east.
It's
also
if
you've
walked
down
there,
a
configuration
of
some
really
interesting
and
very
old
historic
bridges,
aqueducts
all
still
in
place.
C
The
good
thing
is
that
most
of
these
would
all
end
up
in
public
parkland,
they're
all
on
land
that
you
own
now
or
is
intended
to
go
into
public
parkland
I'll
show
you
some
pictures
in
a
second,
but
some
of
it
will
come
from
LRT.
Some
of
it
can
come
from
your
new
library,
some
of
it
you're
already
own.
Some
of
it
is
involved
in
puh-leeze
bridge.
Some
of
it
can
actually
be
delivered
by
this
development.
C
I
think
andrew
did
point
out
the
very
interesting
thing
of
booth
being
highly
elevated
to
get
over
the
existing
bridge,
which
means
the
land
is
down
and
booth
is
up,
and
so
what
we've
been
working
on
is
to
take
the
buildings
and
actually
have
them
meet
the
grade.
So
these
buildings
are
almost
like
a
back
split
anbu
street
they'll
be
built
to
the
grade
of
the
street,
which
will
totally
normalize
it.
You
won't
have
buildings
below
the
street
in
a
pit.
In
essence,
we'll
be
able
to
set
those
buildings
up
to
street
grade.
C
We
have
to
put
a
much
wider
street
scape
in
place
to
accomplish
that,
because
booth
will
go
across
the
face
of
the
building
will
terrace
itself
down,
but
that
leads
you
up
into
the
center
portion
of
the
site
and
it
would
leave
a
very
small
part,
essentially
over
top
of
the
aqueduct
at
the
higher
level,
where
you
would
look
down
into
park.
Space
from
the
outer
edge
of
the
southern
parcel
over
to
the
LRT
would
entirely
be
open
space
across
the
top
a
boost
street
in
this
configuration
in
this.
C
This
is
an
imagery
of
the
amount
of
land
that
is
in
there.
Now
we
have
not
successfully
decoded
all
of
the
treatments
that
will
be
happening
with
the
LRT.
The
new
libraries,
you
know
is
still
under
consideration,
but
this
is
essentially
the
back
yard
of
the
new
library.
The
access
point
into
the
Piz
me
LRT
station
to
the
top
left-hand
corner,
the
outfall
of
the
covered
aqueduct,
that's
in
a
tunnel
or
a
vault,
and
the
northern
walkway
goes
up
and
goes
across
to
to
puh-leeze
bridge
properly
dealt
with.
C
All
of
these
lands
could
be
configured
into
a
pretty
significant,
historically
driven
park
space
there.
You
can
see
the
moment
of
that
there's.
A
very
large
opening
in
this
site.
Development
occurs
on
the
outside.
There's
the
model
of
your
new
library
pegged
in
as
well.
So
you
can
see
the
library
and
the
future
Park
would
have
a
strong
relationship
to
each
other.
You
would
also
use
that
space
to
walk
from
the
library
to
the
LRT
station
you'd
use
the
southern
tier
of
the
walkway
to
do
that.
C
There's
a
very
strongly
worked
out
interconnection
system
of
walking
and
bicycles,
leading
you
from
the
bicycle
paths
that
are
up
in
the
center
portion
past
the
Whitewater
way
down
into
the
station
when
he
sets
from
the
community.
There
are
a
series
of
towers.
We
have
been
adjusting
them.
We
have
analyzed
views,
we
have
Adelaide
shadows.
There
was,
of
course,
a
request
to
ensure
our
shadow
would
never
go
through
the
window
of
the
War
Museum
on
Remembrance
Day,
and
we've
done
that
study
to
ensure
that
that
would
happen
me.
B
D
D
D
Just
you
know
just
to
the
just
to
the
east:
how
do
you
you
know?
How
do
you
respond
to
residents
who
you
know
bought
into
the
first
phase
and
live
in?
What
I
think
is
a
great
neighborhood
for
a
public
realm?
If
you
go
to
lebreton
flats
phase
one
and
just
walk
around
the
the
the
public
space,
it
is
actually
quite
inviting
it's
it's
a
bit
private.
D
Now
that
will
be
less
so
as
we,
you
know,
integrate
more
cycling
and
pedestrian
connectivity,
but
this
will
certainly
have
an
impact
on
on
those
residents
in
terms
of
shadowing,
especially
the
the
45
storey
building,
which
would
come
in
a
second
phase.
How
do
how
do
you
respond
to
that?
How
do
you
respond
to
the
concerns
that
and
I
share
that
matters,
especially
45
stories
is
just
too
high
right.
C
That's
an
excellent
question:
counselor
I
think
there
are.
There
are
a
couple
of
things,
and
this
is
a
good
image
to
look
at
that.
The
buildings
are
what
what
are
considered
to
be
point
towers,
they're,
not
long,
slabs,
they're,
reasonably
small
floor
plates
that
are
more
square
in
shape.
This
would
mean
that
a
shadow
doesn't
cast
a
long
projected
over
the
ground.
It's
a
reasonably
small
one,
which
means
it
moves
over
the
ground
more
quickly.
C
Now,
I
will
also
say
that
a
choice
has
been
made
to
put
the
towers
on
base
buildings,
which
we
would
call
a
podium
building.
You
can
see
from
this
image
that
the
towers
are
pulled
away
from
the
existing
smaller
neighborhood.
Now
the
existing
condo,
you
can
see
is
back
it
almost
it's
almost
in
a
piece
of
land
by
itself
at
some
distance
from
these
towers,
but
the
base
buildings
of
allow
you
to
have
a
scalability
and
a
building
at
the
street
level,
that's
different
than
a
tower.
C
The
other
thing,
of
course,
is
we
have
had
different
configurations
of
these
towers
over
time,
the
smaller
at
25
being
in
board.
The
arrangement
of
these
towers
is
to
put
the
tallest
one,
the
farthest
away,
to
create
the
best
Sun
acuity
on
the
plan.
The
other
thing,
of
course,
that's
interesting,
is
that
with
your
orientation,
these
buildings
would
all
be
on
the
north
side
of
the
park
system.
So
there
isn't
really
in
the
implication,
to
the
Central
Park
system.
C
In
this
case,
it's
it's
a
two-story,
2
3
storey
base
and
that
this
massing
away
from
the
existing
community
and
over
more
significantly
into
the
location
of
the
LRT
station,
is
the
proper
way
to
deploy
remembering
there
will
also
be
a
secondary
tier
of
development
south
of
the
LRT
as
as
well,
which
essentially
will
also
be
on
the
LRT
station
that
could
have
allow
for
additional
transition
going
into
the
much
lower
single-family
neighborhood
to
the
south.
That
would
be
our
technique.
D
And
we
did
have
a
public
meeting
where
you
know
we
did
have
as
its
indicated
in
the
report
about
140
people
show
up
and
a
lot
of
the
discussion.
You
know,
while
some
of
it
was
on
height,
a
lot
of
it
was
on
traffic
impacts,
but
most
of
it
was
about
the
relationship
to
the
existing
neighborhood
and
what
that
looks
like
and
what
that
feels
like
whenever
we
are
building
a
community
that
is
being
proposed
here
today.
D
The
biggest
concern
is
often
that
they
will
not
integrate
well
with
the
existing
community
and
and
and
they
won't
if
in
fact,
they're
just
a
podium
and
a
high-rise
and
there's
no
there's
no
transition.
There's
no
active
frontage
townhouses,
for
example,
on
that
on
the
ground
floor,
and
then
you
know
step
back
and
transition
back
to
to
the
to
the
high-rise.
But
at
least
you
will
come
together
in
the
public
space.
If
you
will
the
way
the
the
residents
do
today,
there's
as
I
say,
there's
excellent
public
space,
and
it's
it's
that
human
scale.
D
That
is
so
important.
I
often
say
that
you
know
Heights
can
be
good
and
bad,
but
it's
it's.
The
way
it
transitions
into
its
existing
neighborhood
and
the
impact
that
it
has
on
the
ground
and
I
just
I'm,
not
seeing
here
today
and
I've,
not
heard
how
the
applicant
intends
to
ensure
that
transition
to
the
height
and
to
ensure
that
there
are
people
living
on
the
ground
working
on
the
ground
and
and
being
on
the
ground
and
and
connecting
with
with
each
other,
with
the
existing
neighborhood
and
this
new
proposed
one.
C
So
I
think
again
it's
an
excellent
question.
I've
changed
the
image.
We
have
a
very
strong
streetscape
system,
that's
being
put
in
place
in
here.
I
think
we
understand
lots
of
people
will
walk
through
here
to
get
to
the
LRT
station.
They
can
choose
many
routes
to
do
so.
Some
people
may
walk
down
booth
Street
and
take
the
elevator,
which
is
why
boo
Street
has
such
a
wide
Boulevard
actually
attached
to
it.
One
of
the
changes
is
also
to
bring
retail
the
institutional
users
into
the
podium
building.
C
C
If
a
commercial
use
wasn't
done
councillor
in
a
development
of
a
site
plan,
you
could
create
units
that
would
go
out
at
grade.
A
kind
of
town
house
form
the
podium
building
is
very
conducive
to
that,
and
if
that
was
something
that,
from
a
market
standpoint,
even
from
a
live-work
standpoint,
would
work,
you
could
do
that
architectural
ewwww,
but
the
biggest
change
here
would
be
to
allow
for
commercial
uses
to
come
down
and
put
shop
fronts
against
the
actual
sidewalk
walking
to
the
LRT
and
to
control
the
height
of
that
podium
building.
C
D
E
Counselor,
if
I
may
add
with
if
you
the
the
zoning
map
that
city
staff
are
recommending
be
approved,
it
actually
requires
active
uses
on
all
our
frontage.
Is
that
Street,
in
particular,
on
the
east
side
of
that
street,
there
will
be
a
requirement
for
great
related
uses.
So
the
experience
you
have
on
the
the
east
side
of
that
street
will
be
similar
on
on
the
west
side,
so
townhouse
type
units
embedded
into
the
podium
of
the
buildings
that
address
that
Street
and
all
the
other
frontages
along
Lloyd
and
Fleet
Street
will
also
have
these.
E
These
active
uses,
I
think
I
mean
we
do
appreciate
the
concerns
around
building
height.
A
lot
of
it
is
tied
to
the
density
we
think
is
needed
to
actually
support
those
active
uses.
So
you
made
a
very
good
point
about
the
quality
of
the
public
realm
and
the
liveliness
of
the
public
realm
being
important
to
supporting
a
real
sense
of
community
to
us.
E
That's
about
the
quality
of
Street
scapes
and
the
park
that's
being
proposed,
but
also
making
sure
that
we
have
those
active
uses
and
if
the
fact
is
we
just
won't,
have
the
critical
mass
to
support,
and
you
know
what
more
than
one
cafe
more
than
one
restaurant,
a
sizeable
food
store.
Unless
we
have,
you
know
a
decent
amount
of
density,
that
it
really
requires
more
than
six
or
twelve
storey
buildings.
E
B
F
You
mr.
chair
yeah,
I,
just
question
the
staff
in
the
stock
presentation.
There
was
a
mention
of
the
fact
that
there
are
no
protected
views
in
this
particular
area.
I
appreciated
the
discussion
or
the
profile
of
the
peace
tower,
but
and
looking
at
the
stock
presentation
and
also
a
mr.
darks
presentation.
G
Thank
You
mr.
chair,
luckily
I
had
the
benefit
of
being
the
file
lead
on
both
applications
that
were
just
referenced
and
I
worked
very
closely
actually
with
both
applicant
teams
and
when
I
say
that
catch-all
I'm
talking
about
internal
and
external
stakeholders
as
well
on
the
Central
Library
piece,
the
view
to
the
north
won't
change
that
site
is
situated
so
that
it
has
sort
of
a
straight
view
down
the
heritage
aqueduct
and
towards
Fleet
Station.
We
did
work
with
looking
at
the
Claridge
proposal:
the
app
these
flats
proposal.
G
That's
this
item
and
Central
Library
applicant
team
staff,
reviewed
that
in
comment,
anon
that
to
make
sure
that
there
weren't
any
sort
of
negative
impacts
with
Sun
shoving
or
views,
even
though
that
there's
no
design
yet
for
that
facility.
There's
a
lot
of
design
criteria
about
open
space
and
and
landscaping
to
make
sure
that,
when
they
look
at
that
design
framework
that
this
proposal
wasn't
gonna
have
a
negative
impact
on
that
and
there
was.
G
F
My
next
question
is
looking
and
I'm
looking
actually
at
mr.
Derek's
presentation,
but
in
terms
of
the
of
the
sequencing.
The
staff
report
acknowledges
that
this
is
a
15
to
20
year,
build-out
and
and
hence
why
there
are
holding
symbols
on
some
of
the
sites.
What
is
the
sequencing
in
terms
of
some
of
those
public
realm
elements
that
that
mr.
Derek
mentioned
so
to
what
extent,
for
instance,
the
future
Park
and
some
of
those
booths
Street
streetscape
improvements?
How
will
that
phasing
work.
G
Mr.
chair,
the
first
phase
of
development
is
intended
to
be
the
30-story
building
at
the
corner
of
booth
and
fleet,
which
the
podium
itself
actually
goes.
Almost
the
full
extent
of
booth,
so
I
would
anticipate
that
when
that
comes
in
as
a
site
plan,
we'll
get
the
details
for
the
treatment
of
booth
Street
with
that
first
application
and
wrapping
around
the
corner
of
Fleet
and
whatever
the
design
is
on
on
Lloyd
streets,
so
almost
completing
that
block
from
from
the
act
of
pedestrian
round
perspective.
G
There's
also
we've
put
in
the
policy
in
the
in
the
site-specific
policies
surrounding
parks
and
open
space
that
there's
going
to
be
a
coordinated
effort
to
ensure
that
the
parkland
the
area
that's
covered
over.
The
aqueduct
is
intended
to
be
ready
in
conjunction
with
that
first
phase
of
development
we've
been
having
lots
of
discussions
with
the
applicant
there's
a
great
amount
of
interest
from
all
parties
to
make
sure
that
that
space
is
done,
and
it's
done
with
the
first
phase.
The
reality
is.
G
If
there's
we've
talked
to
the
parks
department
as
well,
if
there's
not
enough
funds
to
have
the
full
build-out
of
that
space,
whatever
the
end
of
desired
plan
ends
up
being
parks
are
comfortable
in
that
it
can
become
rolled
out
in
a
phased
entity.
So
with
first
phase
of
development
there
should
you
should
start
seeing
some
improvements
on
that
park
space,
as
well
as
the
public
ground
treatment
of
the
streets.
Thank.
F
You
and
my
last
question
relates
to
the
fact
that
across
the
street
from
this
proposed
application,
we've
got
a
very
large
application,
which
is
part
of
the
NCC's
lebreton
flats
redevelopment.
To
what
extent
did
staff
consider
what
was
potentially
going
to
be
happening
directly
across
boo
Street
from
proposed
sight.
G
G
We
also
looked
at
those
plans
to
ensure
that
the
active
frontage
is
all
around
makes
sense
and
at
the
aqueduct
level,
there's
room
actually
to
pass
under
the
bridge,
and
we
know
there's
plans
there's
for
form
up
connections
which
again
will
be
having
those
discussions
with
the
applicant
as
they
come
in
on
the
west
side
of
booth.
So
they
were
considered
as
much
as
they
could
be
at
this
point
in
time.
Okay,.
D
D
G
G
Anticipate
that
when
the
second
phase
comes
in
will
reach
that
threshold
and
the
other
thing
I
want
to
qualify,
is
we've
set
it
up
sort
of
twofold
in
the
policy.
The
very
last
page
on
the
document
compares
the
as
of
right
density
from
today
versus
the
full
build-out,
but
from
a
review
process.
It'll
actually
be
looked
at
on
a
phase
by
phase
basis,
so
whether
it's
triggered
per
phase
or
hasn't
overall.
D
And
on
on
traffic
and
the
impacts
on
traffic
I
know
we
we
did
hear
from
mr.
McKenna
today
about
some
of
the
residents
who
have
who
have
an
issue
with
a
kind
of
the
detour
that
has
to
be
taken
to
get
out,
and
that
goes
back
to
a
2006
site
plan
agreement
that
that
was
always
meant
to
be
in
place.
Wasn't
and
a
favor
once
conferred.
You
know
becomes
something
that
people
expect
so
on
the
traffic
impacts
for
for
the
existing
neighbors
and
then
with
the
addition
of
phase
one.
D
G
G
There
was
several
concerns
when
we
looked
at
the
full
full
kind
of
concept
and
wanted
to
break
it
down
to
understand
what
happens
in
the
first
phase,
because
there's
a
lot
of
assumptions
in
that
larger
concept,
given
that
it
could
take
15
to
20
years
to
happen
and
with
Confederation
line
coming
coming
into
operation,
the
traffic
in
this
area
is
subject
to
significantly
change.
So
we
we
had.
The
applicant
do
a
second
analysis,
a
full
TI,
a
with
just
looking
at
the
first
phase.
G
What
we
discovered
in
reviewing
that
up
in
that
second
document
was
that
the
first
phase
of
development
works.
It
works
with
using
the
existing
Fleet
Street
condition,
which
is
a
right
in
right
out,
and
it
works
with
the
full
signalized
intersection
at
lat
and
Wellington
and
when
I
say
works,
I'm
talking
about
all
modes
of
transportation,
so
pedestrian
movements,
cyclists
movements
and
transportation
movements.
G
Current
to
what's
happening
at
that
time,
with
other
developments
that
are
happening
in
the
area
and
with
the
traffic
impacts
that
are
real.
So
we've
set
it
up
that
way
because
there
were
concerns
about
future
phases,
but
we're
just
not
sure
how
the
traffic
snow
evolved
in
this
immediate
area.
Over
that
time.
D
Thank
you
for
that,
but
what
what
leavers
do
you
have
at
that
point
if,
today,
we're
accepting
a
full
application
and
I
understand
that
there
are
holds
for
various
reasons
on
on
the
next
phases?
But
what
can
happen
if
we
find
out
if
we
realize
you
know
what
for
what
on
a
lot
of
levels,
this
isn't
working,
that's
a
traffic.
D
G
Mr.
chair
I
think
the
leverage
is
the
the
holding
zone
itself,
which
is
you
can
see,
there's
a
number
of
items
in
that
holding
zone
provision.
One
of
them
is
traffic
if,
if
they
can't
demonstrate
that
those
additional
phases
are
working,
we
have
to
work
through
that
conversation
and
we'll
lift
the
hold
when
it's
demonstrator
that
it
works.
That
could
result
in
a
number
of
outcomes
change
to
looking
at
how
traffic
works
in
the
neighborhood.
It
could
even
result
in
a
change
to
the
density
in
the
proposal.
D
It
is
unique
in
the
city
that
we
that
we
have
this,
it's
something
that
I
hope
as
we
move
along
in
building
our
city,
that
it
becomes
part
of
our
an
inclusionary
zoning
policy,
but
but
we
do
have
an
agreement
for
real
affordability
and
and
childcare,
and
that
affordability,
at
my
understanding
is
that
it
is
25
percent
and
it
does
lead
us
right
to
the
20th
percentile,
which
is
a
deep
affordability.
I,
think
it's
seven
percent
at
xx.
Nine
at
thirty
and
nine
at
forty
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
correct
on
that.
D
G
D
G
Chair
the
the
assurance
at
this
point
in
time
is
the
sub
to
be
subdivision
agreement
itself
and
you're
correct
on
the
percentages
being
twenty
thirty
a--the
and
forty
at
seven,
eight
and
eight
percent,
and
the
we've
already
been
in
touch
with
our
housing
group
through
site
and
and
Claridge
has
been
talking
to
them
about
what
that
looks
like
from
an
affordable
housing
agreement
perspective.
The
the
next
step
in
terms
of
your
assurance
would
be
the
conditions
through
site
plan
control.
G
So
when
that
first
phase
of
development
comes
in
through
the
site
plan
application,
that's
where
that
implementation
piece
comes
in
when
we
get
into
the
specific
details
of
how
many
units
are
proposed
in
that
first
phase,
how
many
units
of
that
development
are
affordable
and
the
condition
that
ties
it
to
the
the
next
agreement,
which
would
be
the
affordable
housing
agreement?
So
the
subdivision
agree
puts
it
out
there
in
terms
of
an
idea
if
I
could
phrase
it
that
way
and
the
site
plan
agreement
will
put
it
out
as
an
implementation
piece.
G
D
You
and
I
know
I
said
that
was
the
last
question,
but
I
do
have
one
more.
It's
a
bit
more
broad
base,
because
when
we
did
have
the
open
house,
it
was
to
really
look
at
that
entire
corridor
from
400
Albert.
You
know
with
the
library
this
development
900
Albert
like
it's,
we
are.
We
are
building
really
a
small
city
in
a
very
short
space,
and
you
know
it's
been
brought
up
again
today.
Where
are
the
schools
going
to
be
where
the
recreation
center
is
going
to
be?
D
How
do
we
ensure
that
we're
providing
the
amenities
you
know
grocery
store
is
great.
Obviously
it's
it's
it's
needed
and
that
will
come
with
people,
but
how
do
we,
as
a
city
ensure
that
you
know
if
we
were
building
this,
this
type
of
density
out
anywhere
else?
It
would
be
a
small
city
and
they
there
would
be
schools,
there
would
be
libraries
there
is
a
library
here
mind
you,
but
there
would
be
all
of
those
amenities,
recreation,
centers,
that
the
current
capacity
in
the
current
neighborhood-
just
it's
just
not
there.
G
Thank
You.
Mr.
chair,
that's
that's
an
excellent
question
and
you
know
a
discussion
we
have
with
every
application.
What
I
can
say
is
for
this
committee,
the
way
we've
set
up
the
site,
specific
policies
and
the
zoning.
It's
it's
a
framework
that
allows
that
to
happen.
There's
a
wide
variety
of
amenities,
commercial,
institutional
uses
that
are
permitted
in
this
zoning
and
the
policies
speak
to
and
encouraging
that
type
of
development.
G
At
this
location,
it,
you
know,
becomes
a
council
decision
of
how
we
enforce
that
and
ensure
that
you
know
we
use
the
tools
that
we
have
available
to
us,
which
is
the
zoning
we
put
in
place
and
the
policies
specific
to
this
project,
and
then,
when
we
come
to
a
site
plan
stage
where
you
get
the
more
specific
makeup
of
a
building.
What
I
mean
my
makeup
is
the
mixed-use
configuration
of
what's
actually
going
into
that
project?
Then
it
becomes
a
discussion
with
the
applicant
about
making
sure
hey
this
community
needs.
G
H
You,
chair
and
I
do
want
to
just
pick
up
on
counselor
McKenna's
line
of
questioning
there,
because
we
both
share
a
concern
that,
as
probably
you
know,
10
20,000
people
move
in
from
the
escarpment
through
the
Church
Hill
along
that
corridor,
that
the
amenities
are
there
to
support
those
residents
with
a
sustainable
community
with
a
community
that
offers
quality
of
life
and
I.
Note
that
mr.
Willis
is
here
and
I
would
ask
him.
There
are
facilities
that
are
traditionally
provided
by
municipalities
in
order
to
support
quality
of
life
in
neighborhoods
and
I.
H
Think
one
of
the
key
ones
is
the
recreation
center.
It
offers
the
rehearsal
space
for
the
local
theater
company.
It
offers
the
pool
in
which
municipal
programming,
like
parents
and
taught
classes
older,
adult
classes,
learn
to
swim
classes
are
taught.
We
see
things
like
the
the
recreation
center
has
the
space
in
which
you
have
the
yoga
classes,
I'm,
absolutely
certain
that
this
development
will
have
private
amenities.
It
will
almost
certainly
have
an
indoor
pool,
but
that's
not
where
you
teach
your
kids
to
swim.
How
do
we
intend
mr.
H
E
Mr.
chair,
normally
when
development
of
individual
development
applications
come
in,
these
sorts
of
matters
are
left
to
master
planning
from
the
municipality
to
address,
and
so
the
city
will
have
recreation,
master
planning
and
actually
one
of
the
requirements
of
the
new
Official
Plan
that
we
need
to
adopt
in
the
next
term
of
council
is.
We
need
to
address
these
issues
more
specifically,
so,
with
the
growth
in
an
intensification
that
there
is
a
degree
of
concentration,
it
would
be
through
those
master
planning
exercises
that
we
would
do.
E
Sure,
I'm,
sorry
I'm
unable
to
answer
that
question
with
an
we
can
we'll
reach
out
to
the
other
department
to
find
out
to
our
CFS
to
find
out
what
their
timing
is,
but
they,
my
expectation
is,
is
it
wouldn't
need
to
be
done
in
the
next
two
or
three
years,
particularly
when
we
update
the
Official
Plan?
It.
H
Is
it
is
important?
We
can't
divorce
the
land,
use
planning
approvals
that
we're
doing
through
zoning
and
and
site
plan.
We
we
can't
divorce
those
from
understanding
how
the
neighborhood
is
going
to
evolve
from
a
transportation
perspective
from
a
facilities
perspective
from
an
infrastructure
perspective,
and
it
strikes
me
that
you
know,
particularly
with
the
density
of
housing,
that
we
are
proposing
to
do
here,
that
we're
approving
the
buildings
ahead
of
understanding
how
the
community
is
actually
going
to
be
livable
to
mr.
H
E
Thank
you
very
much
mr.
chair
and
just
coming
back
to
staff
about
the
question
that
mr.
McKenna
raised
about
public
consultation.
I
did
read
the
report.
It
does
mention
in
there
that
there
has
been
public
consultation.
You
just
want
mr.
McCree
to
give
us
the
in-depth
scenario
on
that
public
consultation.
Please.
G
All
right,
my
mic
was
being
slow,
turning
back
on
Thank
You
mr.
chair,
so
yes,
public
consultation.
Mr.
McKenna
did
mentioned
if
I'm
going
back
to
the
beginning
that
the
applicant
Claridge
holmes
had
a
full
public
meeting
back
in
January
2019
that
was
prior
to
any
applications
being
submitted.
So
staff
was
not
involved
at
that
point
in
time
other
than
we
were
aware
of
it,
but
there
was
no
participation
so
to
speak.
G
When
the
applications
came
in,
we
went
through
sort
of
the
standard,
Council
approved
processes
with
signs
on
the
property
and
notification
to
everyone
within
120
meters.
What
we
also
did
for
this
one
is
created
a
little
more
information
through
our
websites,
so
we've
created
a
new
website
called
Ottawa
dot,
CA
/
lebreton
flats,
and
it's
it's
a
website
focusing
on
what's
happening
in
lebreton
flats
development
in
lebreton
flats,
because
it's
it's
in
an
area.
G
It's
getting
a
lot
of
interest
now
and
is
gonna
change
over
the
years,
so
it
was
introduced
through
that
website
and
then
our
devops
portal
as
well.
The
count's,
the
ward
councillor,
called
for
that
open
house
meeting
that
we
had
in
April,
which
was
focused
on
more
of
a
broader
conversation,
but
it
did
focus
on
specific
applications
in
the
area,
including
this
one,
the
library
proposal
as
well
as
Albert.
G
E
E
I
I
G
On
the
point
of
height,
when
the
item
went
to
urban
design
review,
it
was
prior
to
any
applications
being
made,
and
it
was
55
stories
at
that
time,
so
it
did
get
reduced
to
45.
My
comment
was
more
with
respect
to
the
proposal
as
it
was
when
it
was
submitted.
So
it
came
in
as
the
the
range
of
towers
from
25
to
45.
I
G
I
I
I
G
A
traffic
perspective
there's
not
any
changes
in
terms
of
the
access
and
egress
to
the
site,
as
we
know
today,
it's
a
right
in
right
out
only
at
booth
in
fleet
and
it's
a
full
signalized
intersection
at
Wellington
Street.
What
we've
done
is
a
department
to
ensure
that
we're
comfortable
with
traffic
for
the
purpose
of
the
OPA
and
zoning
is
ensuring
that
that
first
phase
of
development
works
and
and
works
in
all
aspects
from
pedestrians,
cyclists
and
and
vehicle
movements
and
access
to
quality,
public
transit.
The
holding
zone
provisions
is
really
I.
G
Think
has
what
has
come
out
of
the
review
of
this
application.
Specific
to
traffic
is
making
sure
that
we're
monitoring
the
results
from
that
first
phase
to
see
if
they
are
meeting
those
intended
targets
from
a
modal
split
perspective
and
building
that
into
subsequent
applications
to
make
sure
that
traffic
works
on
a
phase
by
phase
basis
for
the
overall
concept.
How.
G
I
B
Okay,
I'm,
looking
at
the
board
for
real
this
time,
yeah,
nobody
on
it,
so
seeing
no
further
discussion.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
presentation
today.
I'll
just
add
a
couple
of
points.
I
think
we've,
given
a
good
discussion
in
item
number,
one,
almost
an
hour
and
a
half,
that's
pretty
good
guys!
That
being
said,
you
know
this
project
in
general,
it's
it's
long
or
largest
investment.
B
As
a
city
with
light
rail,
we
had
the
foremost
expert
in
urban
planning,
with
George
char
coming
out,
and
thank
you
for
coming
out
and
speaking
with
us
today
about
the
benefits
of
intensification
and
how
this
is
a
great
opportunity
for
us
and
for
the
last
two
terms,
I've
sat
on
council.
These
councillors
have
always
preached
intensification.
You
couldn't
have
a
better
pitch,
so
you
can't
really
have
it
both
ways
and
I'm,
asking
members
of
planning
community
today
to
walk
the
walk
and
talk
the
talk
and
vote
in
favor
of
this
application.
B
So
on
this
application,
as
it
carried
thank
you,
item
number
two:
application
for
demolition
and
new
construction
at
four
four
three
and
four
four
seven
Kent
Street
the
alteration
at
4:23
to
425
McCloud
Street
property
is
located
in
the
center
of
town,
Heritage,
Conservation
District
designated
under
part
five
of
the
Ontario
Planning
Act
I'm.
Looking
is
there
a
ye,
Lacroix
G
Lacroix
here
to
speak?
Ghee
great
I,
get
you
to
come
down
up
front
here
as
well.
B
A
You
I
also
want
to
thank
the
Heritage
Committee
for
listening
to
all
their
concerns
and
was
very
appreciative,
also
Catherine
McKinney,
for
being
very
helpful
in
this
situation.
I'd
like
to
talk
about
three
points.
Our
property
is
right
next
to
the
proposal.
So
the
first
thing
I'd
like
to
bring
a
point
I'd
like
to
talk
about,
and
also
just
to
put
it
on
record,
is
wherever
there's
going
to
be
excavation
close
to
the
property
line
where
they're
going
to
be
digging
down.
A
The
second
point
I'd
like
to
bring
up
is
in
terms
of
drainage,
our
property.
The
way
it
works
right
now
is
our
property
slopes
down
from
the
property
line
towards
our
house
and
then
as
well,
the
house
or
the
apartment
building
slopes
back
away
from
the
apartment
building.
So
it
creates
a
little
bit
of
a
V
for
the
water
to
come
down
and
even
the
driveway
it
kind
of
all
circulates
down
towards
the
driveways
and
towards
the
bottom
of
the
property
onto
the
street.
A
Now
right
now,
the
property's
proposed
whenever
there's
a
lot
of
water
that
comes
down
it
overflows
right
now
on
to
our
property
and
sometimes
creates
a
bit
of
a
problem.
So
in
terms
of
the
new
proposal,
there's
nothing
been
really
discussed
about.
You
know
the
slope
in
away
from
our
property
line
back
towards
their
area
and
in
terms
of
drainage
like
what
are
they
doing
for
drainage,
because
it's
a
it's
a
fairly
big
build
in.
How
are
they
going
to
deal
with
the
water
and
get
in
the
water
away,
especially
since
right
now
like
it?
A
It
is
a
problem
for
us
a
little
bit
and
if,
if
it's
not
like
addressed,
it
will
be
a
definitely
a
bigger
problem
for
us
and
I
have
seen
examples
of
big
buildings.
A
couple
examples
where
this
wasn't
addressed
and
you
know
I've
talked
to
people
and
they're
like
well,
you
pretty
much
can
assume
they're
gonna.
Take
care
well,
I've,
seen
examples
where
it's
not
addressed,
and
you
can
see
that
the
water
goes
to
the
property
line.
A
These
are
landlords
that
I
just
know
personally,
and
they
showed
me
into
this
and
they
said
make
sure
that
this
is
done.
So
that's
a
point
I'd
like
to
bring
up
that
I
want
to
make
sure
that
something's
done
so
that
the
water
sloped
away
from
our
property
line
and
how
are
they
taking
care
of
the
drainage
away?
A
There
will
be
just
our
tree
and
there
will
be
no
trees
for
the
entire
block
between
the
cloud
and
McCloud
and
Gladstone
for
about
six
houses
up
other
than
the
proposed
new,
smaller
trees
that
they're
gonna
put
in
so
I
really
want
to
talk
about
the
tree.
The
share
tree
now
the
Heritage
Committee
was
fully
on
board
in
terms
of
trying
to
preserve
this
tree.
A
Also
Cather
makini
was
was
on
board.
With
that
calm
it
and
I
quote
its
weight
in
gold
and
so
I.
That's
that's
like
a
big
concern
of
ours.
Now,
like
we
own
that
apartment
building
and
I
mean
we
could
take
the
easy
way
out
and
just
say,
yeah
go
ahead
cut
the
tree.
We
can
get
compensated
for
that.
You
know.
That's
money
like
we
can
use
the
money
right
now.
Let
me
tell
you,
but
at
the
same
token,
like
you
know,
there's
more
to
it
than
that.
There's
the
nature.
A
There's
the
oxygen
like
like
I've
said
before,
like
a
tree
a
tree
like
out
in
out
by
you
know
like
Carlton
place
or
something
like
that.
It
doesn't
grow
as
fast
as
a
tree
downtown
and
that's
because
trees
like
co2
and
with
laka
trees.
Here
they
grow
ten
times
faster,
well,
okay,
exaggeration,
but
they
grow
a
little
bit
faster.
So
did
you
say
30
seconds?
A
Oh
okay,
so
yeah
I'd
like
to
see
what
we
can
do
to
like
preserve
the
tree
and
they
have
taken
steps,
but
we
haven't
heard
anything
left
and
that's
one
thing
I
would
really
like
to
for
us
to.
You,
know,
keep
and
and
not
get
rid
of
it
and
try
to
maintain
as
much
of
the
roots
and
the
canopy
as
possible.
Thank
you.
Thank.
D
E
I
A
I
I
A
A
Part
of
the
reason
that
wasn't
brought
in
with
in
terms
of
their
community,
because
it
was
also
much
more
of
a
personal
note,
and
we
were
recommending
to
bring
this
up
on
a
little
bit
more
personally,
because
it
doesn't
affect
the
community
as
much.
So
that's
why
it's
probably
not
not
talked
as
much
in
the
proposal
as
well
as
it.
The
drainage
and
stuff
hasn't
been
really
addressed,
much
that
that
has
been
brought
up,
but
it
hasn't
been
really
interested.
So
that's
why
I'm
bringing
it
up
like
what
is
possibly
gonna
be
done
with
that.
I
B
D
A
We
bring
you
good
news
over
the
past
several
months.
Our
communication
facilitated
numerous
meetings
with
neighborhood
residents,
the
developer.
We
put
those
two
parties
together
in
the
same
room
and
also
with
city
planners
and
councilors
plenty
of
meetings
planned
conversation,
plenty
of
email
exchanges,
a
lot
of
work,
much
of
it
done
by
volunteers.
A
Throughout
all
this
people
were
flexible
and
reasonable.
It
was
a
good
experience
and
an
education.
How
parties,
with
very
differing
interests,
can
reach
accord.
The
proposal
emerged,
which
you
have
before
you
is
satisfactory
to
almost
all
the
parties
involved
and
the
communitisation
supports
it.
We've
come
here
day
in
the
hope
that
there
will
be
no
changes.
Thank
you.
D
You
chair,
it's
more
of
a
comment
thank
you
for
coming
out
and
for
all
the
work
that
you've
done
over
the
the
last
couple
of
months.
We
have
a
much
better
proposal
in
front
of
us
today
with
better
streetscape
along
Street
like
Kent.
Sometimes
we
think
you
know
what
is
just
Kent
Street.
Anything
is
better,
which
is
true,
but
we
can
do
better
and-
and
we
have
here-
we've
got-
we've
got
a
good
set
back,
we'll
have
room,
for
you
know
good
landscaping
in
trees
and
on
trees.
D
I
just
want
to
get
an
assurance
from
staff
that
we
will
continue
to
work
very
very
closely
with
with
the
the
neighbor
and
the
the
applicant
and
our
own
arborist
to
ensure
that
we
are
doing
absolutely
everything
we
can
to
to
save
that
tree.
I've
made
public
comment
that
I
would
lift
delegated
authority
on
site
plan
if
I
didn't
feel
that
we
had
taken
all
of
the
necessary
steps
to
to
save
that
tree
and
because
it
really
is
worth
its
weight
in
gold.
D
K
E
Just
to
respond
mr.
chair,
yes,
this
is
the
on
the
plan
here.
It's
the
tree
right
here.
It's
located
along
the
property
line,
the
applicant
and,
if
they
come,
they
come
to
speak,
has
taken
some
cutouts
into
the
building
here
to
try
to
create
at
least
a
three
meter
radius
around
that.
But
yes,
through
the
site
plan
control
process
that
will
be
coming
up
with
the
development
of
the
proposed
building
right
here.
B
Great
thank
you
for
that.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
delegation
coming
out
today
and
I
will
also
note
that
we
also
have
written
correspondence
from
aggie,
which
also
spoke
today
and
a
Lucy
Castel.
So
thank
you
very
much
the
delegations
for
coming
out.
We
also
have
the
applicant
rod
Leahy
and
Matthew
mikela.
Did
you
wish
to
speak
today.
L
I
Thank
You
chair,
Missy,
Monsieur,
doc
hi.
You
heard
me
sure
that
cost
some
of
his
concerns
with
respect
to
the
site
plan
a
placate,
the
the
work,
the
proximity
of
the
work
to
his
property,
and
can
you
can
you
provide
us
some
information
with
respect
to
how
you
can
assure
that
the
foundation
will
be
will
be
maintained?
I.
A
Guess,
as
we
move
there's
two
issues
or
three
issues,
you
brought
up
the
the
foundation
work.
As
you
move
closer
toward
construction
project,
we
would
be
taking
a
closer
look
at
ensuring
that
no
damage
would
take
place
so
we'd.
Be
then
meeting
with
the
contractors.
Well,
there's
oils
engineers
and
if
some
temporary
shoring
is
required
to
ensure
protection
that
would
be
part
of
the
construction
process.
Will
you
meet
with
the
neighbor?
Oh
we're,
sorry
that
would
be
including,
of
course,
meeting
with
the
neighbor,
specifically
on
not
only
construction.
A
You
know
techniques,
but
also
timing
of
construction
and
going
over
what's
going
to
take
place
to
ensure
he's
brought
up
to
date,
the
other
with
regards
to
the
stormwater
management.
So
one
of
the
requirements
of
site
plan
approval
is
to
ensure
all
of
the
we
control
all
the
water
flow
within
our
property
and
if
there's
any
overland
flow
from
his
property,
that's
historical.
A
We
ensure
that
is
taken
care
of
as
well,
and
we
are
working
very
closely
with
city
staff,
our
city
tree
conservation,
as
well
as
our
own
arborist,
to
ensure
the
survival
of
the
tree
in
question
and
I.
Think
through
the
site
plan
process,
that's
me
looked
at
right
now:
we've
set
the
building
back
a
minimum
of
three
meters.
A
I
B
Great
Thank
You
councillor,
so
you
know
further
questions
to
the
applicant.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming
out
today.
So
on
the
built
heritage
subcommittee
recommendation
as
amended
is
that
carried
and
on
item
number
three
we
do
have
some
technical
amendments,
councillor
Hubli!
If
you
could
read
that
out.
E
E
The
interior
side
lot
line
replace
that
what
the
text
minimum
at
great
communal
amenity
does
not
have
to
be
located
in
the
rear
yard,
nor
about
a
rear
lot
line
with
at
least
one
aggregate
area
of
minimum
39
meters
and
the
total
amenity
area
required
is
85
meters
squared
an
item
to
be
and
finally
G
by
adding
the
text.
21%
of
the
lot
area
must
be
provided
as
landscaped
area
for
the
lot
containing
an
apartment,
building
low-rise
and
be
it
FURTHER
RESOLVED.
B
Welcome
to
my
world
on
reading
these
things
by
the
way
that
being
said
on
this
item,
is
this
carried
great?
Thank
you
very
much
and
then,
of
course,
the
item
has
amended.
Is
that
carried?
Thank
you.
So
before
we
move
on
to
item
number,
four
I
will
announce
that
we
are
taking
a
recess
from
12:30
to
1:00
o'clock
for
lunch
break.
That
being
said,
we'll
move
on
to
item
number
for
application
to
alter
the
chateau,
laurier
1
rio
street,
a
property
designated
under
part
of
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act.
B
M
Committee
and
mr.
chair,
you
see
in
me
Peter
Kaufman,
who
was
unable
to
attend
this
morning
due
to
a
medical
appointment.
He
would
much
rather
be
here.
He
tells
me
Peter
Kaufman,
as
some
of
you
know,
is
an
architectural
historian
and
a
professor
in
Carleton
University's,
history
and
theory
of
architecture
program.
He
writes
the
standards
and
guidelines
for
the
conservation
of
historic
places
in
Canada
require
than
an
addition
to
a
heritage
building
be
compatible
with
distinguishable
from
and
subordinate
to
the
historic
building.
The
order
of
these
requirements
is
not
arbitrary.
M
Compatibility
is
listed
first
because
without
it,
the
other
two
criteria
are
pointless.
No
building
which
does
not
pass
the
compatibility
test
can
be
considered
to
have
met
standards
and
guidelines
that
the
proposed
addition
to
the
Chateau
lorry
is
not
compatible
with
the
historic
building
and
its
setting
is
no
longer
in
dispute.
M
Among
those
who
have
spoken
out
regarding
the
incompatibility
are
the
founding
director
of
the
Canadian
Centre
for
architecture,
a
former
NCC
chief
architect
to
past
presidents
of
the
Society
for
the
study
of
architecture
in
Canada,
numerous
architecture,
Landscape
Architecture
and
heritage
professionals,
heritage,
Ottawa
and
scores
of
concerned?
Citizens,
moreover,
not
even
the
editions
architect
has
attempted
to
make
a
case
for
the
designs
compatibility
with
its
surroundings.
In
his
remarks
to
the
built
heritage
subcommittee,
Peter
Clues
chose
instead
to
claim
that
the
Edition
has
a
quote.
Gentle
and
soft
touch.
M
Unquote
that
render
it
quote
almost
invisible,
unquote.
In
other
words,
yes,
it
is
incompatible,
but
no
one
will
see
it.
The
unfortunate
reality
is
that
architecture
is
never
invisible.
Although
the
renderings
of
the
edition
attempt
to
persuade
us
otherwise
by
obscuring
the
design
in
deep
shadow
and
hiding
it
behind
trees,
given
that
the
standards
and
guidelines
require
compatibility
and
that
everyone
acknowledges
that
the
addition
and
the
chateaux
are
not
compatible.
The
remaining
question
is
how
to
ensure
that
a
substandard
design
does
not
get
built
in
the
heart
of
our
national
capital.
M
M
M
Whether
the
eventual
addition
is
magnificent,
mediocre
or
deplorable,
whether
it
is
loved
or
loathed
by
future
generations
will
be
your
most
visible
and
lasting
legacy.
As
a
committee
and
as
a
council,
please
exercise
your
authority
and
responsibility,
as
mandated
by
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
to
safeguard
our
heritage
and
your
legacy.
Thank
you
great.
B
Thank
You
Linda
as
you're
reading
a
submission,
there's
no
questions
and
we
have
Peters
a
submission
on
file
as
well.
So
thank
you
for
coming
out.
I'd.
Ask
you
to
vacate
the
chair.
The
next
speaker
will
be
Andrew
Waldron,
followed
by
David
Jensen.
If
I
can
get
to
pre
outran
Graf,
and
forgive
me
if
I'm
butchering
your
last
name
Priya,
are
you
in
the
crowd
great?
If
you
can
come
on
up
we'll
get
you
to
have
a
seat
as
well,
so
Andrew
you
have
five
minutes.
The
floor
is
yours:
okay,.
I
Thank
you
very
much,
so
my
name
is
Andrew
Waldron
I'm
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
National
storage
sites
Alliance
for
Ontario.
This
is
a
network
of
national
search
sites
dedicated
the
protection,
improvement
and
promotion
of
these
sites.
The
chateau
laurier
is
a
National
Historic
Site
such
must
remain
retain
its
commemorative
integrity
when
there
are
alterations
well,
there
are
no
legal
obligations
as
a
National,
Historic
Site.
The
designation
means
that
a
higher
moral
responsibility
and
protection
of
public
worth
is
expected
of
a
nationally
significant
place.
I
The
nature
of
the
hotel
industry
is
changing
and
the
model
of
for
luxury
hotels
is
to
integrate
into
their
management
a
condo
type
business.
We
are
aware
of
this
at
the
Queen
Elizabeth
hotel,
the
ritz-carlton,
the
hotel
Vancouver
and
the
proposals
for
the
Royal
York,
all
in
densely
urban
spaces.
The
venerable
Railway
Hotel
is
changing
in
this
case.
The
Logies
Larco
Investments
has
a
rare
opportunity
to
profit
from
rooms
overlooking
a
publicly
financed
and
federally
managed
urban
park.
I
The
design
process
for
this
addition
has
been
a
failure,
since
the
first
iteration,
which
was
expressed
by
the
mayor
and
in
the
national
news,
the
architects
and
conservation
architect
have
been
unable
to
understand
the
architectural
significance
of
the
Chateau,
the
escarpment
setting
the
public
ceremonial
and
federal
precincts,
the
architectural
expression
of
Ottawa
versus
their
Toronto
home,
or,
by
contrast,
the
urbanism
of
Vancouver
or
Montreal.
The
generic
decorated
box,
with
superficial
allusions
to
the
hotel,
has
been
the
result
and
it
has
been
the
endorsed
by
your
city
staff.
I
The
architects
have
explored
various
narratives
to
explain
the
addition,
contextual
pavilion
in
the
park,
minimalism
and
then
completion
of
a
courtyard,
that's
what
they
termed
it.
Last
week,
these
changing
explanations
demonstrate
that
the
addition
is
yet
to
be
stylistically
coherent.
The
goal
is
a
joy
of
combined
expression.
I'll
emphasize
that
combined
expression
of
we
all
know
that
the
addition,
in
its
current
form,
is
a
failure,
and,
if
built,
it,
will
be
associated
with
with
this
council.
We
know
that
the
shadow
adds
to
our
cultural
heritage
and
improves
our
quality
of
life
both
tangibly
and
intangibly.
I
While
the
architects
have
tried
to
minimize
in
their
presentations
the
impact
the
addition
will
have
on
the
landscape
rather
than
address
the
actual
built
form
as
a
juxtaposition
to
the
Chateau
intelligent
contrast
can
be
successful,
but
in
this
case
the
addition
in
this
case,
the
addition
does
not
attempt
to
be
an
extension
or
companion
to
the
Chateau.
It
remains
incompatible
with
the
hotel.
Councilor
Wilkinson
asked
last
week
to
me
what
would
a
preferable
design?
I
It's
unfortunate
that
the
owners
and
the
proper
of
the
property
did
not
decide
to
have
an
open
and
more
transparent
process
that
would
have
drawn
national
and
international
acclaim
for
a
bold
architectural
expressive,
design
that
was
modern
and
contemporary,
while
also
respecting
and
understanding
the
qualities
of
the
place.
The
proposed
addition
within
its
current
setting
demonstrates
that
there
are
flaws
in
Heritage
processes
and
legislation.
Thirty
Seconds,
yes,
while
also
demonstrating
that
the
city
requires
a
more
rigorous
understanding
of
conservation
standards,
and
this
is
important
and
comprehension
of
Ottawa's
historic
values.
I
Okay,
we
hope
that
the
outcome
will
be
a
signature
addition
to
the
venerable
Chateau
Laurier.
Well,
the
current
market
forces
in
the
hotel
industry
is
driving
these
additions
to
railway
hotels.
Their
additions
can
still
respect
the
architectural,
cultural
and
civic
values
of
these
landmarks
in
Canadian
cities.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
B
You
very
much
for
that.
Andrew
C,
no
questions
a
delegation,
thank
you
for
coming
out
and
if
I
could
ask
you
to
vacate
the
seat
I'll
as
Lynn
Armstrong
Lynn,
are
you
in
the
crowd?
Lynn
great?
If
you
can
come,
take
a
seat
up
front
here.
At
this
point
the
speaker
is
David
jeans,
you're,
no
stranger
to
this
room.
David!
You
have
five
minutes.
The
floor
is
yours,.
N
Thank
You
chair
heritage,
Ottawa's
opposition
to
the
staff
recommendation,
was
contained
in
document
35
of
the
staff
report
to
built
heritage
subcommittee
and
to
Planning
Committee.
It
remains
our
position
that
the
current
design
fails
to
respect
the
cultural
heritage,
value
of
the
chateau
laurier
hotel,
it's
venerable
setting
by
remaining
incompatible
with
the
property's
picturesque
and
romantic
sensibility
as
you've
heard.
N
The
standards
and
guidelines
for
the
conservation
of
Historic
Places
in
Canada,
which
are
official
city
policy,
require
that
additions
be
physically
and
visually
compatible
with
the
heritage,
property
heritage,
Ottawa
and
a
large
body
of
expert
and
public
opinion
believe
that
the
design
does
not
meet
this
standard.
We
support
the
initiative
of
the
built
heritage
subcommittee
to
request
that
the
proponent
modify
the
design
to
quote,
make
the
proposed
addition
more
visually
compatible
with
the
existing
chateau
laurier
prior
to
site
plan
approval.
N
We
also
support
the
be
HSC
recommendation
that
planning
committee
lifts
delegated
authority
for
the
approval
of
the
application
for
site
plan
and
we're
informed
that
city
staff
have
agreed
to
this
heritage.
Ottawa
has
strong
concerns,
however,
that
the
BH
SC
recommendation
does
not
go
far
enough
to
ensure
that
the
subsequent
design
changes
will
achieve
the
design
excellence
while
meeting
the
standards
and
guidelines
compatibility
requirement.
We
believe
that
a
more
robust
review
process
must
be
established.
N
For
this
reason,
it
is
important
that
the
review
continue
to
be
subject
to
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
which
does
give
City
Council
the
right
and
the
responsibility
to
reject
an
inappropriate
design
in
their
deliberations
built
heritage
subcommittee
members
suggested
that
the
2017
heritage
working
group
be
reconstituted
to
guide
the
proponent
on
subsequent
design
changes
and
heritage.
Ottawa
was
represented
on
this
group,
though
members
of
the
group
have
expressed
concerns
that
their
views
were
not
reflected
in
subsequent
changes.
N
This
group
was
co-chaired
by
the
City
of
Ottawa,
an
ash
National
Capital
Commission
and
included
both
local
and
national
heritage
expertise
built
heritage
subcommittee.
Members
also
proposed
that
the
urban
design
review
panel
be
reengaged
in
a
formal
review
of
the
resulting
design,
and
some
members
suggested
that
a
further
public
consultation
should
take
place
prior
to
the
application
being
referred
to
built
heritage
subcommittee
and
planning
committee.
N
In
addition
to
the
measures
outlined
by
built
heritage
subcommittee,
heritage,
Ottawa
also
strongly
encourages
that
recommendation
1e
not
be
approved,
and
that
subsequent
design
changes
should
be
referred
back
not
only
to
build
heritage
subcommittee
and
planning
committee,
but
also
to
full
City
Council.
It's
our
firm
belief
that
Ottawa
City
Council
should
exercise
its
full
authority
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act
by
considering
all
iterations
of
this
significant
and
historic
application.
We
urge
Planning
Committee
to
include
these
measures
as
recommendations
to
Council
Phyllis
Lambert.
N
Ottawa
urges
you
to
follow
the
advice
of
miss
Lambert.
Many
other
architects
and
heritage
conservation
experts
and
hundreds
of
concerned
citizens
to
use
your
full
authority
and
responsibility
under
the
Ontario
Heritage
Act,
to
assure
that
any
approved
additions
to
the
chateau
laurier
are
compatible
with
and
worthy
of,
its
importance
to
Canada's
capital
and
I
just
want
to
mention
that
heritage
Ottawa
has
had
many
media
inquiries.
As
you
know,
we've
had
many
many
thousands
of
responses
to
the
posts
on
our
website.
We've
received
nearly
a
hundred
copies
of
letters
that
have
30
seconds.
Yes,
thank
you.
N
We've
received
well
over
a
hundred
copies
of
letters
that
have
been
submitted
to
the
committees,
to
councillors
and
to
the
mayor
by
members
of
the
public
on
this
subject
and
by
many
people
who
are
acknowledged
experts
in
the
architecture
or
landscape
architecture
or
heritage
fields.
So
we
think
that
you
should
take
that
into
account
and
that
you
must
act
responsibly
with
respect
to
this
application
on
such
an
important
heritage,
building
great,
we
do.
L
Thank
You
mr.
chair
and
thank
you
mr.
genes
for
your
presentation
on
behalf
of
heritage
Ottawa.
We
share
a
similar
concern
and
that
is
that,
if
this
has
passed
that
the
architect
goes
back
and
presents
fifth
version
and
it
still
does
not
meet
those
basic
criteria
that
you
outlined
and
you
provided
some
I
think
useful
suggestions
for
this
committee
to
consider
about
how
that
next
version
gets
developed.
You
talked
about
reinstituting,
the
working
group.
You
talked
about
another
round
through
the
UD
RP
and
more
public
consultation.
L
I
just
want
to
make
sure
and
I
think
those
are
good
suggestions,
but
that's
no
guarantee.
That's
we've
seen
already
that
if
they
choose
to
go
with
a
fifth
version
that
it
will
meet
those
basic
heritage
criteria,
is
there
anything
else
that
you
can
suggest
today
to
get
us
to
that
equilibrium
that
we
need.
N
Well,
I'm,
I'm
afraid
what
I
have
to
say
is
that
moving
forward
by
approving
the
the
recommendations
from
the
built
heritage
subcommittee,
which
is
the
absolute
minimum
that
you
should
do,
we
do
not
believe
that
the
the
proposal
should
be
accepted
without
those
conditions,
but
I
do
share
your
concern
that
we
are
still
then
dependent
on
the
the
the
goodwill.
If
you
like,
of
the
proponent,
which
we
unfortunately
can't
count
on,
and
the
cooperation
of
city
heritage
staff,
which
we
have
been
assured,
will
be
there.
B
I
I
completely
applaud
the
opinions
that
have
been
coming
from
this
public
bench,
I
couldn't
say
it
better,
I
think
there's
just
such
an
incredible.
A
lot
of
people
saying
the
same
things
over
and
over
again
and
I
just
wanted
to
leave
just
two
comments,
possibly
to
the
planning
committee.
This
project
is
important.
It
sets
a
precedent
just
because
democracy
matters,
people
matter
and
the
people
who
actually
enjoy
building,
even
if
they're
not
trained
in
it
matter
their
opinion
matters
and
there's
a
lot
of
ideas
on
coming
from.
I
You
know
the
bottom
end
and
my
you
know
it's
completely
seconds
what
was
just
said
a
few
minutes
ago,
just
an
appeal
to
there's
a
variety
of
design
proposals.
A
variety
of
suggestions,
we've
just
heard
a
few-
maybe
the
last
couple
of
weeks
and
today,
just
to
open
that
up
to
more
participation,
I
think
will
have
solutions
that
are
completely
not
to
shut
the
door
today
in
just
taking
things
ahead.
Thank.
B
B
B
J
My
name
is
Lynn
Armstrong
I'm,
a
heritage
landscape,
architect
and
my
particular
concern
is
for
the
impact
on
major
Hills
Park
and
the
view
that
it
will
have
and
how
it
will
impact
on
the
park.
This
is
a
basic
Chateau
I,
just
googled
Chateau.
You
can
see
it's
a
strong,
solid
building.
It
sits
firmly
in
its
landscape,
it
has
usually
elegant
staircases
and
terraces
on
both
sides
of
the
building
and
it's
firmly
attached
to
the
site
that
it
sits
on.
J
J
This
was
the
major
hill
park
that
the
building
was
actually
put
on.
The
site
of
part
of
the
site
was
taken
to
build
the
site
next
slide.
Please,
and
this
is
the
slide
showing
the
rear
of
the
building.
Now
this
was
the
view
of
the
building
with
the
parking
garage
level.
You
can't
see
it,
it
was
nicely
landscaped.
You
can
see
the
building
is
sitting
in
the
landscape.
It
was
a
good
marriage
of
the
park
and
the
building
too
gave
it
an
adequate
setting
and-
and
they
worked
together
next
slide-
please
so
I
was.
J
Why
did
it
bother
me
this
new
addition
and
I
googled
industrial
business
park
architecture,
and
you
can
see
in
my
mind
the
building
that's
being
proposed
is
of
that
style.
It's
got
very
strong
vertical
lines,
rather
than
horizontal.
It's
sitting
up
on
podiums,
it's
open
on
the
bottom.
It's
not
attaching
itself
strongly
to
the
ground,
and
that's
now
going
to
be
the
view
next
slide,
please.
J
J
J
Only
has
benches
and
lighting
standards
and
the
planting
design,
but
it
takes
a
lot
of
its
style
from
what
surrounds
it
and
I
think
putting
in
a
building
that
sort
of
an
industrial
Business
Park
building,
as
the
main
view
where
all
you're
going
to
see
is,
are
in
the
park
of
the
Chateau
as
the
roofs
you
lose.
That
impact
and
the
on
the
park
can
I
have
the
next
slide.
Please,
and
this
is
sort
of
where
I
get
my
vision
of
the
Business
Park.
This
is
actually
a
building.
J
That's
been
built
in
bar
Haven
in
a
Business
Park
and
I'm,
not
an
architect,
I'm
the
common
man
and
when
I
see
the
new
addition
reflects
very
much
this
style
of
building
mind
when
I
see
it
I'm
going
to
read
office,
building,
Business,
Park
and,
and
it
totally
changes
the
the
emphasis
of
the
of
the
historic
major
Hill
part
when
it
doesn't
have
a
view
of
I'm,
not
saying
it
has
to
have
the
view
of
the
shadow
glory,
but
it
has
to
have
the
mass
of
the
building.
That's
like
that
and
sitting
on
the
ground.
B
Great,
thank
you
very
much
for
the
presentation.
Miss
Armstrong
I,
don't
see
any
questions
to
the
delegation,
so
thank
you
for
coming
here
today
we
do
have
the
applicants
and
the
D
crowd.
If,
if
there
is
questions
for
the
applicants
and
failing
any
questions
at
that
point,
it'll
be
questions
to
staff
and
I
would
like
to
leave
councillor
Nussbaum
the
chair
of
build
heritage,
which
has
done
a
tremendous
amount
of
work
to
to
wrap
up
on
this.
So
any
questions
to
the
applicant
any
questions
to
staff.
At
this
point,
seeing
none
councillor
Nussbaum.
F
F
The
second
was
a
sculpting
recess
and
breaking
up
the
North
facade,
that's
the
side
of
the
building
that
faces
major
Hills
Park
to
try
and
get
more
undulation,
more
relief,
more
breakup
of
that
fairly
solid
and
uniform
mass,
and
the
third
issue
was
to
have
greater
articulation
and
of
the
are
of
the
architectural
expression
on
all
three
of
the
public
facing
sides
to
get
to
that
issue
of
compatibility
with,
and
we
tried
to
thread
the
needle
mr.
chairman
between,
on
the
one
hand,
giving
the
applicant
and
heritage
staff
specific
enough
guidance.
F
So
they
knew
how
to
move
forward
but,
on
the
other
hand,
not
tying
their
hands
wreck,
knowing
that
this
is,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
a
creative
exercise.
So
we
tried
to
thread
that
needle
with
the
language
you
see
before
you
in
paragraph
one
of
the
motion,
I
want
to
very
quickly
address
a
couple
of
the
other
points
that
were
raised
and
that
I
think
are
important
for
members
of
this
committee
to
understand
in
terms
of
next
steps.
F
So
with
councilor,
flurries
agreement
site
plan
will
be
lifted
and
the
idea
there
is.
This
gives
planning
and
council
an
opportunity
to
look
the
revised
application
when
it
comes
back
following
this
discussion
between
staff
and
the
applicant
and
the
vhs-c
will
be
provided
an
opportunity
to
comment
before
it
is
tabled.
That
planning
and
the
reason
why
you
have
that
specific
language
is
be
vhs-c
under
the
Planning
Act
doesn't
have
a
formal
role
on
site
plan,
so
we
couldn't
and
because
the
Heritage
permit
is
going
to
be
issued.
F
If
council
agrees
to
whatever
recommendation
planning
puts
forward
this
morning,
the
BHS
he
can't
under
the
Planning
Act
have
a
more
formal
role,
but
the
idea
was
to
ensure
that
they
have
had
an
opportunity
to
comment
on
the
application
before
it
comes
to
planning
and
the
last
point.
Mr.
chair,
there
have
been
questions
about
whose
staff
would
consult
with
as
part
of
the
discussion
they
will
have
with
the
applicant
and
staff
were
clear
last
week
that
they
plan
to
bring
forward
any
revised
plan
to
the
you
DRP.
F
The
you
DRP
had
established
a
small
subcommittee
in
the
spring
to
provide
feedback
and
work
with
the
applicant
and
staff,
and
so
staff
stated
last
week
that
their
plan
would
be
to
essentially
bring
that
revised
application
to
that
same
group,
so
that
ensures
that
we
have
some
of
the
same
players.
Who've
been
involved
in
this
in
terms
of
an
outside
advisory
role,
maintaining
their
role
moving
forward.
So
mr.
chairman,
that
I
think
explains
the
key
features
of
the
motion.
F
B
Thank
you
councillor,
Nussbaum
I,
want
to
thank
you
for
all
the
hard
work
chair.
Herders
is
back
with
me
here
right
now,
and
we
know
how
much
you
put
into
this.
Also
note.
We
have
18
piece
of
Correspondence
that
we've
also
received
so
a
built
heritage
subcommittee
recommendation
as
amended.
Is
that
carried.
B
B
O
O
I
just
have
two
elements:
one
which
is
a
direction
to
staff,
which
was
confirmed
by
a
court
curry
earlier.
That
staff
will
continue
and
review
the
elevator
projections
that
were
further
raised
beyond
the
materials
and
and
some
of
the
fourth
northern
facade
that
also
the
elevator
projection
that
that
would
impact
some
of
the
view
sheds
will
be
carried
through
in
the
next
steps.
So
maybe
a
court,
if
you
could
just
for
the
record,
confirm.
N
O
You
and
then
you
did
share
with
us
with
committee
members
kind
of
the
next
steps
in
terms
of
review
and
approval.
I
know
that
there's
an
important
element,
which
is
the
community
engagement,
which
is
highlighted
here
as
being
a
meeting
of
the
the
revision
under
the
UD
RP.
Do
you
set
timelines
as
to
when
that
could
happen,
and
and
also
how
we
plan
to
inform
the
public
of
that
that
meeting
itself.
N
Councillor
following
Council's
approval,
tomorrow
of
this
report,
we
will
embark
upon
the
site
plan
process
working
with
the
applicant
on
the
conditions
that
have
been
put
before
us
by
Council
with
respect
to
the
cladding
and
architectural
expression
of
the
building,
so
that
process
will
will
take
a
number
of
months.
Our
hope
is
to
be
in
a
position
to
come
back
to
built
heritage
subcommittee
and
planning
committee
in
the
early
winter
with
a
site
plan.
So,
prior
to
that,
we
will
be
working
with
that
special
focused
urban
design
review
panel,
a
working
group.
N
That's
a
public
meeting
process
that
we
will
advertise
on
the
city's
website
and
can
certainly
share
with
your
office
and
any
other
councillors
office.
And
then,
of
course,
the
public
will
be
able
to
participate
in
the
review
of
the
report
through
the
built
heritage
and
planning
committee
process
as
well.
Okay,.
O
And
just
as
my
final
comments,
I
know
that
the
the
objectives
do
meet
the
section,
11
or
portion
of
the
section
element
goals
I.
You
know
I
spoke
about
this
at
committee
in
terms
of
the
guidelines
and
I
think
that
the
guidelines
are
there
and,
as
you
know,
as
we
sit
here
at
committee
and
others,
if
the
applicant
initially
had
wanted
to
amend
those
guidelines,
we
would
be
in
a
different
context.
O
I
know
that
not
not
using
the
word
replica,
because
that's
certainly
maybe
not
what
a
city
staff
are
comfortable
with
or
does
or
desire,
but
there
is
I
think
it's
important
to
bring
to
the
floor
of
committee.
This
understanding
that,
if
an
applicant
is,
does
want
to
build
something
that
is
similar
as
an
extension
that
that
could
have
been
amended
in
terms
of
the
guidelines.
O
As
I
said
before,
with
obviously
Oh
the
overall
compatibility
of
this
addition
I'm
concerned
about
the
elevator
projections,
obviously
some
of
the
materials,
the
Eastern,
the
eastern
wall
and
respecting
the
connection
between
the
park
and
the
existing
facade
and
the
pop
crochet
specifically
are
of
concern
to
me
and
and
the
community,
and
also
the
aspect
of
I,
described
it
as
a
slide
building.
Just
because
I'm,
not
an
architect
and
can't
speak
eloquently
too.
O
But
but
this
built
this
massing
of
the
build
form,
and
obviously
that's
some
of
the
work
that
that
the
the
architect
and
the
team
will
we'll
look
forward
to
just
has
a
wrap-up
just
as
a
I.
Just
want
to
thank
the
chair
of
built
heritage
and
the
built
heritage
committee.
Also,
the
chair
of
planning
who
worked
with
us
on
on
the
motion
I
was
brought
forward.
O
It
would
have
been
easy
for
built
heritage
to
just
overturn
or
refuse
the
staff
position,
but
I
think
this
is
a
a
good
step
in
working
with
the
applicant
and
working
with
the
city
for
a
design
that
will
be
will
be
worked
through
and
will
be
better
than
than
what
we
have
today.
So
I
want
I
want
to
thank
the
community.
I
wanted
to
thank
city
staff
and
I
want
to
thank
members
of
council
for
their
efforts
and
in
bringing
forward
an
addition
that
will
be
representative
of
such
an
iconic
site
in
our
city's
downtown.
B
B
M
Morning
welcome,
my
name
is
Carolyn
McKenzie
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
Glebe
Community
Association
I
just
want
to
start
out
by
saying
that
we've
been
meeting
with
Minto
in
the
city
over
the
past
year
to
try
and
shape
this
building
so
that
it
fits
in
better
with
its
location
on
Bank
Street
in
the
heart.
It's
right
in
the
heart
of
the
Glebe.
The
first
proposal
that
Minto
came
forward
with
was
essentially
a
nine-story
building.
M
When
you
include
what
was
a
fairly
significant
mechanical
projection
up
top,
there
was
a
public
meeting
back
in
January
and
about
200
people
give
or
take
came
out
and
I
think
they've
they've
voice
fairly
significant
concerns
around
the
impact
of
height
and
massing
of
the
building
on
the
surrounding
homes
and
on
Bank
Street
itself.
The
communities
also
have
been
very
concerned
about
the
loss
of
a
number
of
businesses
at
the
it
wouldn't
in
the
existing
building,
because
those
businesses
serve
the
community,
and
this
proposed
building
will
all
be
residential.
M
At
the
time
a
petition
was
circulated
and
at
last
count
I
would
say
roughly
about
a
thousand
people
had
put
their
names
to
it,
and
I
and
I
met,
and
I
mentioned
this
specifically
just
to
give
an
indication
of
the
level
of
interest
in
that
this
proposal
has
attracted.
Since
then,
the
building
has
evolved
and
some
important
changes
have
been
made.
M
Most
people
I
talked
to
both
understand
the
rationale
for
and
support
intensification,
and
from
my
view,
what
we've
been
trying
to
do
is
to
strike
a
better
balance.
So
we
end
up
with
a
community
that
remains
strong
and
vibrant,
and
that
respects
our
character.
It's
what
we
should
all
want
for
every
community
in
this
city.
It's
not
just
about
doing
something
for
the
Glebe
we
can
get
behind
redevelopment
on
Bank
Street,
but
what
we're
seeking
is
development
that
fits
in
and
transitions
better
to
the
existing
neighborhood
development.
That
does
not
necessarily
sacrifice
our
tree.
M
We
also
are
looking
at
development
that
does
not
constitute
too
much
density,
given
the
public
amenities
that
we
all
need
to
share,
and
that
remains
a
bit
of
an
open
question.
I
would
like
to
recognize
the
efforts
of
the
city
in
Minto
with
respect
to
the
amendments
that
are
before
you
today,
and
that
I
would
ask
you
to
support
these.
M
Amendments
may
seem
relatively
small,
but
they
are
important
changes
that
will
help
the
building
to
better
transition
to
the
to
the
two-story
residential
homes
that
are
right
next
to
this
building
on
4th
and
5th
Avenue,
and
in
particular,
I'd
also
like
to
thank
the
city
for
recognizing.
What
has
you
know?
M
We've
only
got
about
eight
blocks
of
Bank
Street
on
in
the
Glee,
but
we
are
facing
increasing
development
pressure
on
those
blocks
and
I'm
very
encouraged
by
the
motion
before
you
as
well
today,
to
commit
to
pursuing
some
sort
of
secondary
plan
process
as
soon
as
possible
in
the
next
term
of
council.
That
takes
a
more
holistic
view
at
how
Bank
Street
can
and
should
develop.
M
P
You
very
much
Carolyn,
and
it's
should
be
no
surprise
to
anyone
how
hard
you
you
work
on
this
on
behalf
of
the
Klebe
Community
Association
and
as
you
do
on
all
files,
but
how
many
times
that
you
collaborated
and
also
I.
Thank
you
for
your
attention
to
the
work
that
Mentos
did
in
in
the
role
that
they
played.
I.
P
Think
that
when
more
and
more
we're
seeing
opportunities
where
the
communities
where
the
applications
are
coming
forward
are
having
a
healthier
process
for
sure,
because
we
have
a
willing
developer
speaking
to
a
willing
community
association
to
talk
about
how
can
this
work
and
that's
always
our
best
way
to
go,
no
matter
how
long
it
takes
John?
Did
you
want
to
comment
on
how
you
see
the
the
secondary
plan
or
how
we
are
whatever
we're,
calling
it
that's
going
to
benefit
the
leave
Community
Association.
P
E
P
E
We're
just
going
through
the
process
of
confirming
sort
of
what
we
would
include
in
what
we're
calling
the
CDP
light.
It's
recognized
that
the
primary
issue
is
here
really
is
around
density
and
in
particular
height,
and
while
the
official
plan
has
general
policy
direction
on
that,
I
think
there's
a
recognition
that
this
area
could
benefit
from
having
a
closer
look
at
some
of
the
contextual
considerations
that
really
come
into
play.
So
that's
what
we're
really
gonna
be
directing
our
energies
towards
in
terms
of
trying
to
frame
out
what
that's
gonna
look
like
so.
P
E
Madam
chair
I
think
it's
a
little
bit
early
stage
right
now
to
confirm
exactly
what
the
process
is,
whether
this
translates
into
a
secondary
plan
or
more
specific
direction
in
the
framework
of
the
zoning
directions
that
are
established.
We
haven't
gone
to
that
point
yet,
but
that's
definitely
something
that
we're
taking
a
look
at
so.
P
E
So,
madam
chair,
it's
our
intention
to
meet
with
the
community
shortly
the
next
little
while
to
fit
to
refine
the
scope
of
the
exercise.
If
we
need
to
go
into
a
secondary
plan,
we
will
it's
just
with
changes
to
the
provincial
edge
of
planning
legislation.
That
may
not
be
then,
as
necessarily
the
ideal
thing,
but
if
that's
something
that's
important
to
the
community,
we
will
go
there
almost
certainly
we'll
be
looking
at
zoning
changes
and
we'd
like
to
meet
with
the
community
within
the
next
couple
of
weeks
to
map
out
a
work
program.
P
Like
that
next
couple
of
weeks,
maybe
you
would
want
to
share
your
any
vacation
dates
that
you
have
so
we
can
make
sure
that
that
does
happen.
Thank
you
very
much
for
coming
out
to
this
sound
people
can
visit
in
the
sound
go
up
in
here
at
all,
because
I
don't
have,
but
anybody
else,
but
normally
at
council.
It's
not
this
difficult
to
hear.
P
Thank
you
thanks
Carolyn
next
up
we
have.
Oh,
did
you
have
Carolyn
come
on
back,
see
I'm
I'm,
not
frazzled
or
anything
I'm,
just
like
not
in
play
yet,
and
thank
you
for
everybody
for
your
patience
that
I
actually
thought.
Yesterday
I
told
my
staff
to
phone
the
school
and
say
that
I
couldn't
come
because
of
today's
meeting
and
on
the
way
home
to
bar
Haven.
Yesterday
I
thought
you
know
what
you
haven't
missed
one
meeting.
P
F
F
So
my
question
to
you
is
given
that
the
GCA
has
come
forward
in
this
case
and
is
recommending
that
we
agree
with
the
staff
recommendation
for
the
revised
up
to
seven
storeys.
Do
you
feel
that
you
have
the
assurances
that
you
needed
from
staff
to
ensure
that
this
is
not
a
precedent
for
the
remainder
of
Bank
Street,
given
your
strong
views
on
with
the
road
width
being
what
it
is
and
your
concerns
about,
45
degree,
angle,
airplane,
so
I'm
just
curious.
M
Thank
you
for
the
for
the
question,
I
guess
in
short,
I,
don't
think
that
we
have
any
particular
assurance
of
that
I
know
in
every
community
where
proposals
are
coming
forward
and
it's
a
bit
more
than
what
people
are
looking
for
residents
and
in
the
Glebe
and
elsewhere.
I
always
say
well
are
worried
and
they
ask
about.
Will
this
set
a
precedent
and
to
my
understanding,
the
question
from
city
staff
is,
is
not
know
and
not
yes,
it's
every
every
project.
Every
application
will
be
considered
on
its
merit.
M
So
picking
up
on
that,
our
view
was
okay,
if
that
makes
sense,
and
let's
have
that
building
similarly
transition
so
to
the
the
southern
end
of
the
building
was
fire.
The
northern
end
of
the
building
was
lower
as
it
moved
northwards
into
the
Glebe,
so
four
storeys.
Now
we
find
this
building
going
up
to
well.
The
original
proposal
was
sort
of
eight
or
nine
stories,
depending
on
how
you
look
it
now
we're
looking
at
seven
stories.
So
yes,
in
short,
it
it
is
a
concern
that
that
height
will
possibly
be.
M
There
will
be,
you
know,
basis
for
further
applications
coming
forward
and
asking
applications
for
further
height
going
northward
into
the
up
Bank
Street.
That's
that's
clearly
continues
to
be
a
concern.
I
guess.
Our
hope
is
that
as
before
and
I
mean
this
past
year,
we've
been
working
with
Minto
the
year
and
a
half
two
years
before
that
we
were
working
with
the
beer
store
proponents.
You
know
dealing
with
these
applications,
one
by
one
by
one
as
the
height
marches
up
the
street,
a
it's
both
time-consuming,
time-consuming.
As
you
know,
I
do
have
a
day
job.
M
This
has
got
to
be,
you
know
done
around
the
sides
and
it
is
extremely
time-consuming-
and
it
also
so
perhaps
not
sustainable,
and
then
the
other
consideration
is
that
it
just
dealing
with
these
on
a
one-off
basis
does
breed
a
lot
of
cynicism
within
the
community
and
that
cynicism
is
born
of
people.
Looking
at
this
owning
Varla,
which
says
four
stories,
and
then
proposals
come
in,
for
you
know
eight
or
nine
stories
whatever
and
then
very,
very
close,
very
quickly,
we're
moving
towards
that
greater
height,
so
I
think
we
need
to
do.
M
We
can,
whether
it's
you
know
CDP
light
secondary
plan
process
to
try
and
reduce
that
we
want.
We
need
some
room
to
to
maneuver
for
architects
to
bring
forward
different
design
solutions
so
that
we
can
see
rejuvenation
on
the
street,
but
right
now
that
that
that
golf
is
just
is
so
wide
that
it
does.
It
is
breeding
a
lot
of
cynicism.
Sorry,
that's
a
long-winded
answer
to
your
question,
but
you
know,
hopefully
if
we
can
get
a
secondary
plan
or
something
like
that
in
place
in
itself.
B
Just
go
for
the
therefore
be
resolved.
I,
don't
know
who
rates
these
things,
but
they're
they're,
pretty
big.
So
there's
a
lot
of
chapters
in
here
so
get
ready,
therefore
be
resolved
that
the
Planning
Committee
direct,
the
general
manager
of
planning
infrastructure
and
economic
development
to
review
the
opportunities
for
a
limited,
secondary
plan
process,
focus
on
identification
of
the
appropriate
height
and
density
strategy
for
those
properties
fronting
directly
adjacent
to
Bank
Street
from
the
highway
417.
B
The
Rideau
Canal,
with
the
accompanying
modifications
to
zoning
bylaw
and
report
back
to
Planning
Committee
no
later
than
q4
2019.
Therefore,
it
be
resolved
that
the
Planning
Committee
recommend
council
approve
the
general
manager
of
planning
infrastructure
and
Economic
Development
Department
to
be
delegated
the
authority
through
the
site
plan
process
to
approve
the
design,
changes
to
the
southeast
corner
of
the
site
and
attempt
to
preserve
the
existing
says,
nature
but
I'm
sure
that's
nature.
Trees
such
mature
trees,
such
as
cut
out
of
area
D
or
the
measures
deemed
appropriate,
therefore
be
resolved.
B
The
Planning
Committee
recommend
to
council
approve
the
new
portion
on
the
rear
of
the
building
and
facing
the
rear
yards
of
the
residential
neighborhood.
Thank
you
to
the
East
labeled
area.
I
be
limited
to
the
four
storeys
of
the
maximum
height
of
no
more
than
13
meters
to
the
section
of
area
II
on
the
fourth
and
fifth
avenues
and
wrapping
around
the
corner
of
the
rear
of
the
building
remaining
five
storeys
with
the
maximum
fifteen
point.
Eight
meters,
therefore,
be
it
further
resolved
that
the
Planning
Committee
recommend
council
approved
document.
B
Three
schedule
of
the
original
staff
report
be
replaced
with
document.
Three
schedule
attached
here
within
therefore
be
further
resolved.
The
planning
committee
recommend
to
council
approved
document.
Two
of
the
staff
report
be
revised
as
follows:
a
revised
section,
one
read:
rezone
lands
in
document
1
from
TM,
H,
2
TM
s.
You
can
see
it
in
front
of
you
on
the
screen,
be
revised
section
2
a
to
read
in
column
to
add
the
text.
B
Tm
again,
you
can
read
that
in
the
screen
see
revised
section
to
be
to
add
the
following:
the
holding
symbols
may
be
lifted
only
when
the
following
conditions
have
been
met:
I
review,
the
details
of
site
plan,
landscape
plan,
building,
elevations
and
urban
design
review
and,
to
forgive
me,
submissions
and
approvals
of
the
site
plan
committee,
application
and
satisfaction
to
the
general
manager
of
planning
infrastructure
and
economic
development.
Bia
further
resolved
that
no
further
notices
pursuant
to
subsection
34:17
of
the
Planning
Act.
P
Q
Thank
You
chair
so
I'm
working
through
this
process
planning,
but
we
started
planning
prepared
a
report
with
a
recommendation,
including
a
detailed
zoning
schedule,
showing
the
building
form
to
be
permitted
on
the
site.
After
the
report
was
completed,
the
Glee
community
association
came
to
continue
to
work
with
planning
staff
and
Minto
and
the
counselor
and
moving
forward
with
the
revised
building
format
that
would
address
those
transitions,
especially
in
the
rear
of
the
building
adjacent
to
the
residential
neighborhoods.
P
K
Somehow
this
document
suggests
to
me
that
that
zoning
continues
to
be
nothing
but
a
suggestion.
I
have
two
concerns
one.
It
seems
to
me
that
there
are
exemptions
from
the
constraints
of
zoning
which
are
being
permitted
here,
but
there's
no
particular
justification,
and
the
second
problem
I
have
is
that
in
the
public
consultations
that
were
held,
there
was
misinformation
that
was
conveyed
and,
unfortunately,
that
doesn't
establish
a
good
basis
for
our
required
discussions
about
about
a
secondary
plan
or
other
other
features
or
frankly,
for
for
the
new
official
plan.
K
So
first,
what
is
it
I'm
concerned
about
in
the
specifics?
Well,
what
would
be
wrong
with
building
this
project?
In
accordance
with
the
constraints
of
the
zoning,
it
would
be
quite
possible
to
intensify
in
a
building.
That's
15
meters
tall
in
a
building
with
side
yard,
setbacks
of
3
meters
and
with
a
rear
yard
setback
of
7.5
meters.
K
Not
only
would
not
only
would
that
be
quite
possible.
I
suggest
it
would
probably
be
quite
successful
and
we
wouldn't
have
to
have
this
meeting
at
all
my
concern
about
the
misinformation
the
misinformation
was.
We
were
told
that
gee
the
zoning
bylaw
is
void,
those
that
5
meter
height.
It's
not
true,
because
the
reference
saying
up
to
6
meter
up
to
6
up
to
6
storeys
in
the
Official
Plan
rendered
the
zoning
bylaw
void.
I,
don't
think,
that's
true,
I
think
that's
misinformation.
K
A
misinterpretation
of
the
Official
Plan
was
used
to
confuse
the
public
about
what
was
in
fact
permitted
on
site
now
they're
applying
for
permission
to
go
beyond
15
meters.
That's
fine,
but
please
don't
tell
the
public
that,
as
of
right,
you
can
build
a
6-meter
building
a
six-story
building.
You
don't!
The
second
thing
that
concerned
me
was
that
the
argument
was
presented
that
it
was
possible
within
the
present
structure
of
the
zoning
bylaw
to
move
massing
around
on
a
site.
K
I'm
not
saying
it's
a
bad
idea:
I
just
don't
see
the
legal
basis
on
which
you
can
do
that.
I've
searched
in
the
zoning
bylaw
for
this
concept,
about
picking
up
massing
in
one
place
and
adding
it
over
there
and
that's
in
fact
what
was
at
one
point
proposed
for
this
site
to
take
the
building
potential
above
the
shops
on
Bank
Street
and
move
it
over
and
put
it
on
top
of
the
apartment
building
being
built
behind.
Well,
if
we're
going
to
do
that,
let's
have
a
legal
basis
on
which
that
can
be
done.
K
Let's
write
that
into
the
zoning
bylaw
and
you
might
think
I'm
a
great
defender
of
the
zoning
bylaw
I'm,
really
not
I
was
there
at
the
beginning.
It's
like
making
sausage
it's
better,
not
to
know
what
goes
into
it,
because
all
we
did
was
we
forced
all
the
previous
zoning
bylaws
into
the
comprehensive
zoning
bylaw.
It
was
not
a
pleasant
process
food.
It
had
to
be
done
so
I'm,
not
saying
we
should
have
a
static.
K
Bylaw
I
don't
worship
it,
but
we
should
have
a
way
that
gives
the
zoning
bylaw
what
our
chairman
set
called
teeth.
The
zoning
bylaw
should
have
some
meaning.
It
should
not
be
out
of
sync
with
the
Official
Plan.
It
should
be
dynamic.
It
should
be
changing
with
changing
circumstance
and
that's
why
I
welcome
the
idea
that
we're
going
to
have
this
study,
whether
the
study
should
be
confined
narrowly.
The
study
should
be
conducted
all
across
the
city
everywhere
in
this
city
we
probably
have
zoning
constraints
that
are
out
of
date.
P
Thank
you.
Thank
you
for
coming
out
today.
I'll
just
remind
you
that
at
12:30
we
are
taking
a
scheduled
break
for
half
an
hour.
Next
up
is
Judy
peacock
and
Carol
McLeod.
Can
you
come
up
and
take
the
chair
beside
Judy
is
Carol
here
there
you
are
thank
you
and
then,
after
after
they
speak,
then
we
have
the
applicants.
R
What's
been
spoken
about,
ninety-nine
Fifth
Avenue
and
the
massing
of
the
building
has
been
fed
very
well
and
I.
I
want
to
address
two
other
things.
I
would
like
to
talk
about
the
social
and
public
impact
on
the
neighborhood.
Now
I'm,
not
a
neighbor
of
this
building.
I
live
quite
far
away,
so
I
don't
have
a
particular
interest
in
in
it
I'm
in
the
neighborhood,
where
I've
lived
since
1974.
R
One
thing
that
worries
me
very
much
about
this
development
is
the
loss
of
public
amenity
when
the
99
5th
Avenue
was
built,
as
it
is
now
and
was
given
permission
by
this
council
to
be
built
in
that
form.
One
of
the
chief
arguments
for
its
development
at
that
time
was
that
it
contained
a
wonderful
inner
courtyard
with
a
fountain
that
would
become
a
public
amenity
in
perpetuity
and
would
be
very
welcome
in
all
the
winters
to
come.
It
would
be
a
space
for
the
community
and
for
casual
dropping
in
and
social
interaction.
R
The
second
thing,
I
would
like
to
say
very
quickly
is
that
the
city
has
spent
a
lot
of
time
and
money
with
Nature
Conservancy
Canada
and
also
with
safe
wings
Ottawa
to
produce
a
leaflet
which
has
been
circulated
in
huge
stacks
on
all
public
buildings
around
the
city,
about
how
windows
kill
birds
and
in
this
leaflet,
and
in
the
report
that
the
city
and
Nature,
Conservancy,
Canada
and
safe
wings
came
up
with,
was
the
recommendation
to
which
the
city
agreed
that
all
future
buildings
should
have
windows
in
them.
With
these
special
glass.
R
Settings
inside
that
do
not
cause
accidental
bird
strikes.
We
know-
and
it
says
in
the
leaflet
the
retrofitting
with
decals
and
all
sorts
of
other
things
is
useless,
and
the
city
has
strongly
recommended
that
these
windows
be
strike.
Proof,
so
I
hope
that
the
city
will
enforce
its
own
recommendations
with
regard
to
the
windows
and
please
look
into
the
legality
of
closing
off
this
public
amenity.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thanks.
P
Very
much
and
as
far
as
the
windows
go,
that
will
be
looked
at
through
the
site
plan
process.
Kirsten
she's
saying
yes,
thank
you
for
coming
next
up
we
have
Carol
McLeod,
and
then
we
have
the
applicants
for
questions.
If
you
want
to
ask
some
questions,
do
it
before
we
go
on
to
you
Carol,
do
any
of
you
need
to
speak?
If
there
aren't
questions.
S
Chair
and
committee
I
support
the
glaive
community
associations
position,
but
I'd
also
like
to
give
you
a
sense
of
issues.
My
immediate
neighbors
have
with
me
just
proposed
development,
I
moved
to
four
thousand.
Can
you
hear
this
all
right,
I
moved
to
fourth
Avenue
in
1975,
just
as
meant
it
released
its
plans
for
Fifth
Avenue
Court.
It
was
to
be
Ottawa
Lodi
in
Muse,
with
trendy
owner-operated
shops
in
a
courtyard
for
public
events.
S
Most
recently,
Mentos
provided
space
for
the
city's
Ottawa
2017
office,
the
neighbors
generally
favored
the
commercial
opportunities
and
Gathering
Place
offered
by
5th
avenue
court,
but
shop
owners
couldn't
afford
Mintos
rents
as
high
as
any
in
the
city.
Three
tarts
and
kaleidoscope
books
tried
to
make
a
go,
but
as
rents
climbed,
they
were
forced
to
move
public
events
and
5th
Avenue
Court
had
a
longer
history.
For
several
years
the
NAC
held
its
Christmas
fair
and
it
welcomed
art
shows
and
similar
events.
Eventually,
even
those
events
disappeared.
S
Fifth
Avenue
Court
provides
commercial
space
for
the
professional
offices
so
necessary
to
a
viable
community.
My
neighbor's
value
the
fact
that
their
doctor,
dentist,
physiotherapist
or
chiropractor
are
within
a
five
a
five
minute:
walk
of
home.
These
professionals
accessible
to
neighbors
and
me,
and
so
needed
in
a
walkable
community,
may
be
forced
out
of
the
Glebe,
because
our
community
has
no
affordable,
accessible
commercial
space.
S
I
recognize
that
it's
not
mentos
business,
to
provide
commercial
space
professional
serving
the
community
Mendez
business
is
making
money
plain
and
simple
and
that
it
sets
out
to
do
with
this
proposed
seven
storey
condo
with
a
hundred
and
twenty
one
units
in
the
heart
of
the
Glebe.
As
the
city
planner
report,
notes,
I
and
overwhelming
majority
of
my
neighbors
oppose
this
development.
We
object
to
its
height
density,
massing
and
traffic
challenges.
S
If
the
development
conformed
to
his
getting
zoning
and
infill
gardening's,
the
issue
would
not
be
a
problem.
The
developer
wants
to
over
build
on
the
property
in
every
way.
Yet
in
Eclipse,
inexplicably,
while
city
planners
acknowledge
a
number
of
elements
of
the
development
that
are
well
above
existing
rules,
they
nevertheless
support
it.
Let's
take
the
elements
one
by
one
height,
the
existing
height
limit
is
15
meters.
A
developer
can
squeeze
5
storeys
on
Bank
Street
from
the
Queensway
to
the
Rideau
River.
S
The
zoning
is
the
same
examples
of
developers
who
have
conformed,
apparently
profitably
to
the
city's.
Existing
murals
include
DOMA,
solid
banking,
Strathcona,
the
bank
and
Clem
Oh
development
proved
by
this
committee.
Earlier
this
year,
kitty
corner
from
the
Mentos
site
at
fifth
and
Bank.
The
beer
store
North
End
referenced
earlier
and
at
grobin
Bank
in
Ottawa.
So
Ottawa
wants
to
build
2:22
meters
25
on
the
mechanicals
on
the
northeast
corner
of
the
building
overshadowing
4th
Avenue.
Why?
When
other
developers
are
held
to
city
rules,
should
men
to
be
granted
exemption
density?
S
The
city
wants
to
encourage
densification
to
alleviate
urban
sprawl,
but
a
hundred
and
twenty
one
units
is
one
and
a
half
times
the
total
number
of
dwellings
currently
on
4th
Avenue
more
units
than
the
13
story:
Terran
Tower
at
first
in
the
Queen
Elizabeth
Drive
on
half
the
footprint.
The
units
are
not
designed
for
families,
a
problem
that
Minto
Beachwood
shared
added
to
the
36
condos
at
4th
in
the
canal.
This
is
a
huge
population
increase
for
a
downtown
street
massing.
S
S
The
facades
of
the
town
houses
on
fourth
and
fifth
are
well
forward
of
the
porches
of
existing
houses
along
both
blocks
traffic
and
parking.
There
are
currently
seven
yard
spaces.
Fifth
avenue
court
for
business
and
staff
and
patrons
Minter
proposes
a
two-story
parking
garage
with
13
spaces
for
guests
commercial
parking.
The
remaining
spaces
will
be
sold
to
condo
owners
likely
at
the
Lansdowne
price
of
$35,000.
A
spot
mentor
will
sell
unsold
spaces
to
other
owners.
S
True,
the
city
has
a
parking
garage
at
third
and
Bank,
but
people
being
people,
those
who
do
not
buy
parking
spaces
will
park
on
street.
Also
if
the
Lansdowne
experience
is
replicated
more
than
a
few
of
the
units
will
be
runners
Airbnb
s,
ask
any
Homewood
resident
what
happens
when
Airbnb
tenants
find
they
have
no
parking
traffic
will
be
affected.
I
hope,
you've
read
my
neighbors
submissions
on
the
subject.
A
P
S
Since
November
29th,
we
mental
failed
to
file
its
application.
The
city
is
treated
at
citizens
cavalierly,
although
the
city
planner
argues
otherwise.
Consultation
with
community
over
this
major
development
has
been
limited.
The
result
of
this
is
that
people
no
longer
feel
they
have
agency.
They
stop
participating
in
the
democratic
process.
Watch
numbers
fall
in
this
next
minimis
of
election
people.
Wonder
what's
the
point
that
should
concern
us
all.
Thank.
P
I
P
Okay,
so
you
know
what
we'll
have
one
two
three
four
five
six,
but
still
have
quorum.
Let
me
check
again
one
two
three,
four
five
six,
so
the
two
of
you
can
go
to
your
meeting
and
we'll
go
to
questions
of
staff
from
the
people
that
are
on
committee
that
are
still
here
and
then
we'll
break
after
we
will
vote
a
little
break
and
then
the
half
hour
will
start
from
there,
but
it
allows
the
two
of
you
to
go
to
your
meeting.
Okay.
P
L
P
L
E
Madam
chair,
what
the
this
was
not
part
of
the
original
work
program.
This
is
certainly
coming
as
a
result
of
the
frequency
of
planning
applications.
We've
been
getting
in
the
Bank
Street
corridor
and
certainly
councils
previous
direction
was
that
we
should
be
completing
transit,
oriented
development
plans
within
the
Greenbelt
area,
but
because
faced
stage
two
of
the
LRT
will
take
several
years.
E
We
still
think
we
can
get
back
to
do
that
and
go
back
and
adjust
two
or
three
areas
within
the
Greenbelt
with
high
development
pressures,
where
we
feel
that
updating
existing
plans
will
be
meet
address
some
of
the
high
priority
issues
Rea
being
raised
in
the
community.
We
had
a
previous
committee.
We
had
committed
to
doing
the
Westborough
Community
Design
Plan
Update,
we're
adding
the
Bank
Street
to
that
list.
I
think.
L
That
was
a
motion
that
my
colleague
ed,
put
forth.
I'm
raising
this
madam
chair
is
because
I
have
CDP's
that
are
over
20
years
old,
where
there
is
significant
development
going
on
now,
where
that
hasn't
been
the
case
and
I'm
not
opposed
to
this
motion,
but
it
brings
up
to
the
fact
that
we
have
multiple
CDP's
that
are
far
surpassed.
Their
vintage
is
quite
old
and
I'm
just
trying
to
get
a
better
sense
as
we
go
in
transition
to
the
next
council.
L
How
we're
gonna
deal
with
CDP's,
particularly
those
that
are
quite
aged,
so
I
mean
that
may
take
some
time
to
answer,
but
I'm
concerned
that
you
know
some
folks
are
striking,
while
the
iron's
hot.
Yes,
it's
germane
to
raise
this,
it's
probably
appropriate
to
review
that,
but
are
there
other
neighborhoods
that
can
make
equally
the
same
type
of
arguments
for
refreshing
CDP's
that
really
have
no
planning
merit
anymore?
We've,
just
you
know,
evolves
so
much
within
the
last
couple
decades.
P
Mr.
willis
responds
I
just
want
to
say
that
we
are
responding
to
a
unique
situation
with
volumes
of
applications
in
the
Glebe
Bank
Street,
particularly,
and
certainly,
as
we
just
did
with
councillor
leaper
in
his
area.
They
don't
have
a
secondary
plan,
let
alone
any
other
means
of
having
any
kind
of
firmness.
I,
don't
think
personally
that
we
know
where
we're
gonna
go
with
CDP's
in
the
future,
whether
we're
going
to
continue
to
have
the
CDP.
P
E
However,
in
the
short
term,
in
two
areas,
with
very
very
high
frequency
of
applications,
clustered
in
a
very
small
geographic
area,
that
being
Westborough
in
the
second
being
Bank
Street,
high
concentration,
very
small
geographic
area
I,
we
would
like
councils
consent
to
modify
the
work
program
previously,
provided
we
previously
provided
to
focus
on
getting
those
up
to
date.
First,
before
proceeding
to
other
T
of
these
sites
that
are
further
out,
knowing
that
the
Train
is
a
few
years
coming.
L
Khan,
please
there
we
go
I
could
just
see.
Googly
argue
that
in
Riverside
Park
North,
but
have
seen
basically
no
development
in
decades
is
now
seeing
significant
development.
I
can
make
the
same
argument.
What
I'm
looking
for
as
a
member
of
council
is
rather
than
doing
these
one-offs
looking
at
the
city
as
a
whole,
and
so
I
can
be
assured
that
neighborhoods
I'm
completely
not
involved
in
that.
L
If
CDP's
are
required,
that
we're
doing
that
and
we're
doing
that,
because
it's
the
right
thing
to
do
so:
I'm,
not
gonna,
argue
against
West,
burrow
or
the
Glee,
because
I
think
arguments
have
been
sound
why
they
need
to
be
done,
but
I'm
looking
at
CDP's
in
my
own
area,
which
are
completely
out
of
date,
they
have
really
no
planning
sense.
Now,
when
we're
looking
at
the
types
of
planning
applications
that
are
coming
forward,
but
when
I
saw
this
today,
I
thought
we.
L
H
Thank
You
chair,
the
the
key
discomfort
I
have
is,
with
the
the
the
size
of
the
wall
abutting
the
properties
that
are
to
the
east
of
this
building.
The
rear
yard
of
this
building
is
supposed
to
have
a
seven
and
a
half
meters
step
back
from
the
lot
line.
The
rear
lot
line
is
the
line
that
runs
north-south
along
those
Eastern
properties.
H
Is
there
any
more
color
than
you
can
give
me
around
why
we
are
recommending
in
favor
of
something
that
doesn't
have
that
seven
and
a
half
meters
step
back
other
than
what's
on
page
14
of
the
the
planning
report?
As
I
read
the
planning
report,
it
says
it's:
okay,
not
to
have
a
rear
yard
setback
with
seven
and
a
half
meters,
because
it
matches
the
side
yard
setback
requirement
on
the
street,
which
is
a
meter
and
a
half
that
does
not
make
sense
to
me.
There's
a
reason
that
we
treat
traditional
Main
Street
buildings
differently.
Q
Thanks
for
your
questions,
so
I'm
just
going
to
bring
up
the
zoning
schedule
here
in
response
to
councillor
leavers
question
about
the
step
backs
it's
a
little
bit
hard
to
see
here,
but
we've
used
some
color
just
to
illustrate
the
different
transitions
and
Heights
just
to
make
it
easier
for
everybody
understand.
So
here
we
have
a
two-story
portion.
Q
So,
as
you
can
see-
and
this
is
part
of
the
motion
that
came
forward
earlier
today-
is
that
at
the
rear
of
the
building,
the
motion-
and
this
new
schedule
shows
that
that
building
height
will
actually
be
two
stories
high
and
in
relation
to
the
adjacent
residential
neighborhood
that
lines
up
generally
with
the
built
form
of
the
detached
and
semi-detached
buildings
to
the
east.
And,
as
you
can
see
here
in
the
in
the
zoning
schedule,
there
is
a
cutout
in
the
middle
of
the
building,
and
that
is
intended
to
respect
that
rear
yard
condition.
Q
Q
So
there
is
a
1.5
meter
setback
on
the
east
edge.
This
is
consistent
with
the
required
setbacks,
for
there
are
three
zone
to
the
east,
so
the
are
three
zone
allows
up
to
even
as
low
as
zero
point
six
meters
setback.
So
you
can
see
that
that
is
characteristic,
and
you
will
see
this
built
form
and
with
the
development
of
this
it
will
create
a
continuance
of
that
Street
front,
and
you
know
a
continuance
of
that
that
built
form
that
side
you're
at
setback,
condition
and
even
of
the
height
that
is
permitted
there
today.
Q
H
The
key
difference,
though,
is
that
that
smaller
setback
for
the
r3
is
between
buildings.
That,
overall,
have
you
know
a
an
r3
built
mass
mass.
What
we're
proposing
here
is,
despite
the
step
backs
after
the
various
different
levels.
Is
you
know
a
seven
story
building
going
up,
so
somebody
in
their
rear
yard
immediately
immediately
in
the
courtyard
of
this
building.
There
may
be
the
appropriate
step
back,
but
they
are
still
seeing
seven
floors,
rising
up
with
relatively
minimal,
relatively
minimal
step
backs
and
I'm.
H
Q
Just
to
provide
more
information,
what
we
can
show
further
in
the
zoning
schedule
is
so
this
two
and
three-story
component
on
the
east
is
setback
1.5
meters
from
the
property
line,
and
then
we
have
a
four
story
component
in
a
five
story
component
and
with
this
side,
yard
setback
plus
a
step
back.
So
that's
three
and
a
half
meters
from
the
east
property
line,
plus
the
setback
that
the
neighbor
to
the
east
also
enjoys,
and
then
further
to
that
we
have
a
four
meter
step
back
for
this
six
story.
Q
So
the
seventh
story
is
set
back
significantly
from
the
east
property
line
and
from
the
east
residential
neighborhood.
For
a
total
of,
we
have
four
meters
to
meters,
eight,
nine
and
a
half
years,
if
I'm
doing
my
math,
yes,
nine
and
a
half
meters
in
total,
so
that
actually
exceeds
the
seven
and
a
half
metre
setback
and
provides
that
step
to
transition
in
height
to
the
existing
as
a
residential
neighborhood
and
with
the
work
of
the
Glee
Community
Association.
P
T
This
is
a
project
where
I
am
choosing
not
to
ask
you
to
vote
against
the
amendments
that
we
have
in
front
of
us.
They
are
better
than
what
we
were
facing.
They
are
an
improvement.
So
therefore,
I'm
asking
you
to
support
them
and
I
won't
be
disingenuous.
I,
don't
have
a
vote
here
planning
today,
but
when
it
comes
to
counsel,
I
won't
be
disingenuous
and
say:
hey,
you
guys
do
the
dirty
work
vote
for
it
and
all
vote
against
it,
but
thanks
very
much
know
where
we're
at
really
here
and
here's.
T
My
metaphor
with
this
project
is
I
feel,
like
I've
run
up
against
a
wall
enough
times
that
my
head
hurts
and
I.
Don't
think
and
I
don't
want
to
do
it
anymore,
I,
don't
think
the
problem
is
actually
my
head
I
think
the
problem
is
the
wall.
I
think
the
problem
is
that
we
have
supposed
doning
certainty
and
planning
certainty.
We
have
a
community
who
expects
that
they
have
it
and
yet
time
after
time,
we've
actually
seen
that
the
documents
that
we
think
of
certainty
don't
actually
do
that.
T
So
that
has
to
be
repaired,
because
if
we
cannot
repair
the
situation
where
we
have
if
we
needed
a
community
design
plan,
as
has
been
asked
for
where
we
have
zoning
and
an
official
plan
where
people
can
say,
barring
some
extra
true
ly,
exceptional
circumstance
where
an
applicant
can
make
a
really
strong
argument
for
exception.
You
cannot
expect
to
come
into
a
neighborhood
in
a
Main
Street,
that's
zoned
for
15
meters
and
present.
T
So
let's
say
four
stories
present
eight
or
nine
stories
and
then
bring
it
back
down
to
seven
and
say:
look
we
listen
to
the
community,
but
it's
still
three
stories
beyond
what
the
zoning
says.
It's
still
three
stories
beyond
not
to
mention
the
setbacks.
The
issues
that
my
colleague
counselor
Leif
were
raising.
T
It
still
smacks
to
anyone
without
a
planning
background,
and
even
those
with
often
has
inappropriate
to
its
context,
I'm
not
here
again
to
make
a
passionate
rallying
cry
to
try
to
overturn
this
project
because
I've
done
that
enough
times
and
lost
every
time
and
just
feel
like
I.
Don't
have
the
energy
anymore
for
that.
What
I
have
the
energy
for,
and
we
have
to
be
working
on
now-
is
providing
that
certainty.
We
heard
it
a
few
years
ago,
but
it
hasn't
happened
yet.
T
Otherwise
we
will
get
what
we've
heard
people
say
here
today
is
the
community.
They
came
out
that
came
to
the
first
public
meeting.
300
of
them
raised
their
concerns
they
sent
in
letters,
but
then
they've
really
just
disengaged
they've
disengaged,
because
they're
really
they've
said
it
in
their
letters
to
us.
What's
the
point,
why
would
I
even
try
to
understand
planning
and
try
to
make
a
clear
planning
based
argument
when
it's
going
to
go
through
anyway,
and
we
are
at
the
point
where
it's
going
to
go
through
anyway?
T
T
The
commitment
to
a
CDP
is
very
important
and
I
feel
that
if
it's
going
to
go
through,
as
the
voting
record
seems
to
show
it
will
it's
critical
that
these
particular
design
improvements
be
made,
but
it
ultimately,
we
have
to
reach
a
point
where
a
traditional
Main
Street
remains
the
traditional
Main
Street
and
that
is
somewhere
in
the
four
to
six
story
range
at
most,
it's
not
seven
stories
and
we
have
to
get
back
the
trust
of
the
broader
community.
That
planning
means
something
and
their
voices
do
count
for
something.
Thank
you.
P
Well
said
mr.
counselor
Cherno
chenko,
I
just
wanted
to
to
say
that
I
think
that
I
don't
know
that
people
are
giving
up
as
much
as
you
know.
They
are
I.
You
can't
say
that
when
you've
got
people
in
the
community
that
work
as
hard
as
you
do
and
as
certainly
others
do
and
others
that
are
here
today,
but
you
know
I
think
something
else
that
we've
seen
because
of
that
work.
That's
being
done
by
your
community,
going
out
to
I
did
a
little
bit
of
a
count
here.
P
This
is
a
good
example
of
an
applicant
and
the
community,
and
yourself
working
really
are,
and
staff
I
want
to
thank
everyone
that
was
involved
and
I'm
I'm
I'm
pleased
that
we've
come
up
with
a
solution
today
that
I
think
that,
whether
it's
you
know
no
matter
what
it
is
that
you
were
concerned
on
I
think
that
there's
been
movement
that
has
that
is
supporting
that.
So
I
really
hope
that
the
next
step
that
we
are
looking
forward
to
with
the
process,
mr.
Willis,
will
be
something
that's
you
do
define
in
the
next
two
weeks.
P
We
at
least
have
that
conversation.
So
we
know
what
that's
going
to
look
like
and
then
we
can
message
it
to
the
community
as
well.
So
we
have
a
technical
amendment
that
was
moved
by
Vice
Chair
Tierney
is
that
carry
carried
and
on
the
item
as
amended
Carrie
that
by
Councillor
leaper
thanks
again
cows
returning
chenko
and
everybody
that
came
out
today,
so
we
are
gonna,
take
a
half
an
hour
break
whoa,
wait
a
minute,
wait
a
minute
not
yet
we're
gonna.